CHAPTER II.

Earliest caravan trade—Ophir—Port of Ezion-geber—The voyages of the Jewish ships—The inland commerce of Solomon—Babylon—Gerrha and Tylos—Babylonian commerce—Assyrian boats—Lydia—Ionia—Caria—Phrygia—Scythians—Their caravan routes to India, viâ the Caspian.

Earliest caravan trade.

Reference has already incidentally been made to a few of the caravan routes of very ancient times: these and other more important routes will now and hereafter be considered somewhat more in detail, as, antecedently to the invention of boats, there must have existed some interchange of commodities between different nations and tribes on land, by the agencies of different kinds of beasts of burthen; and, here, the records of Holy Writ are, as in so many other cases, the first available; the earliest caravan noticed in history being that mentioned in the 37th chapter of the book of Genesis, v. 25: “behold, a company of Ishmaelites came from Gilead with their camels bearing spicery and balm and myrrh, going to carry it down to Egypt;” and again, v. 28: “Then there passed by Midianites merchantmen; and they drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver.”

Here there is a clearly defined trade at a very remote period of authentic history, and one which there is no reason to suppose was even then new or unusual.

Moreover, a somewhat subsequent statement, “all countries came into Egypt to Joseph for to buy corn” (Gen. xli. 57), proves that Egypt was already what it remained for many centuries, the granary of adjacent, and even of distant nations; while some of the goods she received from Palestine in exchange were in great demand for the embalmment of the Egyptian dead.

This the first regular trade appears to have been conducted wholly by camels, the “ships of the desert:” an animal marvellously adapted by Providence for the toil it has to undergo in traversing for many continuous days almost waterless deserts.

It is worthy of note, too, that in the earliest notice we have of any trade at all, we find slave-dealing in full operation; and, supposing for a moment the Biblical date B.C. 1862 to be correct, it is an interesting though accidental coincidence, that in the year 1862 after Christ, the same inhuman commerce was finally put a stop to in the United States by the direct action of its government.

But the brief words of Genesis imply more than is at first obvious—they imply a trade with Arabia—possibly even with the yet more remote India; for balsam and myrrh are products of the Arabian province, Hadramaut, and the spices may have come either thence or from India. In like manner there is reasonable probability for believing that in the remotest ages there was a trade between Egypt and the borders of the Persian Gulf and Indian Oceans; indeed, recent researches strongly lead to the belief that the Egyptians, like the Phœnicians, were immigrants from the same neighbourhood, and connected, therefore, with the chief cities of Chaldæa, such as “Ur of the Chaldees,” the primitive Babel, and other sites, the great mounds of which have been partially explored by Loftus and Taylor, though it is not as yet possible in all cases to assign to them their true ancient names. Babylon, the great city of Nebuchadnezzar, did not then exist, nor could Nineveh have been of importance, at least commercially. All the evidence available, and especially that obtainable through the latest interpretation of the Cuneiform Inscriptions, tends to show that the greatest people in the earliest period were the Chaldæans—a race probably older than the Egyptians, and like them of Hamite origin—the true inventors of alphabetic writing, astronomy, agriculture, navigation, and of other sciences, which the Semites, in after days, claimed as their own exclusive discoveries.

It was in connexion with this trade that the ports at the head of the Ælanitic gulf came first into existence. As the caravans of Edom or Idumæa passed to and fro between Egypt and the borders of Arabia, the foundation of Elath and Ezion-geber would be but the satisfying of a necessary want; becoming, when seized by King David, places of much greater importance than they could have been in the hands of Hadad, or of any other petty Idumæan prince.

Ophir.

David would seem to have been the first, in connection with caravans from Petra and from the west, to open up, by means of a line of ships, that trade with “Ophir” which his son Solomon afterwards made so famous. Where and what “Ophir” was, has been the subject of innumerable essays by men of learning, but to enter into a discussion of this uncertain though interesting inquiry, would be out of our province. Let it suffice that the first notice in the Bible[127] clearly means by “Ophir” someplace in Arabia, where great wealth was found, and was no doubt applicable afterwards to all other similar places. Those writers who, relying on the native Indian names of some of the products said to have come thence, assert Ophir to be the name of a people near the mouths of the Indus, advance opinions more ingenious than convincing. If Ophir were an Arabian entrepôt for the trade of India, the occurrence of Indian names for certain Indian products would be as natural as the use in English of the Persian word shâl, which we pronounce as they do, “shawl.” Then David’s “gold of Ophir” may have been simply descriptive of quality, as we used to speak of “guinea-gold.”[128]

Be this, however, as it may, it is certain that to David the Jews owe their first practical knowledge of the result of successful commerce, though a careful consideration of the story of his life suggests that his coffers were filled, not so much by any legitimate trade, however extended, as by the conquest and plunder of his neighbours. Though probably not averse to royal monopolies, the fashion of his day, David was a great warrior, and it is likely, indeed it is so stated on more than one occasion, that it was by the capture of Philistine (Phœnician) towns, the overthrow of Moab, the plunder of Hadadezer, the garrisoning of Syria and of its chief city, Damascus, and the extortion of heavy tribute as the condition of peace, that David accumulated the enormous wealth which he proposed devoting to the building and decoration of the future Temple at Jerusalem:[129] but God said, “Thou shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast shed much blood upon the earth in my sight.”[130]

To Solomon more strictly belongs the great commercial results of a long and peaceful reign, materially aided as this was by the king’s personal superintendence, by his visits to Elath and Ezion-geber, by his treaty of amity, mutual forbearance, and important commercial arrangements with Hiram, King of Tyre, and last, not least, by the extraordinary fame he thus obtained, leading, to the memorable visit to him by the Queen of Sheba, and to the display of his wisdom and wealth, till she felt, on beholding them, that “there was no more spirit in her.”[131]

Port of Ezion-geber.

Dean Stanley, in his “Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church,” has eloquently described the position of Solomon’s chief port, where, he says,[132] “Ezion-geber, the ‘Giant’s backbone,’ so called, probably, from the huge range of mountains on each side of it, became an emporium teeming with life and activity; the same, on the eastern branch, that Suez has, in our own time, become on the western branch of the Red Sea. Beneath that line of palm trees which now shelters the wretched village of Akaba, was then heard the stir of ship-builders and sailors. Thence went forth the fleet of Solomon, manned by Tyrian sailors, to Ophir, in the far East, on the coast of India or Arabia. From Arabia also, near or distant, came a constant traffic of spices, both from private individuals and from the chiefs. So great was Solomon’s interest in these, that he actually travelled himself to the gulf of Akaba to see the port.”

It appears that the fleets though manned by Tyrian sailors, were under charge of Jewish supercargoes, who were responsible for the stores and merchandise, and conducted all the trading operations. This happy alliance materially extended the commerce of both countries; for shut out from the Mediterranean by the inefficiency of the ports of Palestine, and with no communication with the Indian Ocean, except by caravans traversing the Arabian desert, the Jewish people could in no other way have derived material advantages from the valuable and much coveted trade of the East. For the first time, too, the trade of Europe was opened to the Jews through their connexion with the Tyrians; while, on the other hand, the merchants of Tyre found in Israel a large and lucrative field for the full development of their commerce.

The voyages of the Jewish ships.

So far as can now be ascertained, the joint fleets of Hiram and Solomon sailed periodically from the Ælanitic or Akaba gulf, for the East, somewhere between November and March, when the winds are favourable for a voyage down the Red Sea. Thence, probably, a portion of the ships shaped their course for the south-east shores of Africa, from the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, to Zanzibar and Sofala; while a second portion coasted to the northward till they reached the shores of Beloochistan, Baroach (Barygaza), and even the western coasts of Hindostan. Over-sea voyages from Arabia to India were doubtless of considerably later date, when the character and use of the monsoons had been more or less ascertained. “Every three years once came the ships of Tarshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and peacocks;”[133] a length of time which, at first sight, seems scarcely credible, yet is accounted for by the habits of those early mariners. The merchants of those days had no factors as consignees of their produce or home manufactures, with orders to have ready a cargo in return. They were therefore obliged to keep their ships as a floating warehouse until the exported cargo had been sold, and the produce of the country they were to take in exchange was ready for shipment. Indeed Herodotus states, what seems to have been a common custom, that when their stock of corn was exhausted, the mariners landed at some convenient spot, sowed corn, and reaped the harvest, before proceeding with their voyage.[134]

The inland commerce of Solomon.

There is some difficulty, looking at the present desolate and barren state of Palestine and of the districts around it, in realizing the possibility of such vast productiveness as the story of Solomon evidently implies; and the face of the country must have greatly changed in the last two thousand eight hundred years, for, now at least, the land of the Edomites, and a great portion of Arabia from the Persian Gulf to the Euphrates on the one side, and to the Red Sea on the other, is perfectly barren. Yet, that Babylonia was once of extraordinary fertility we know from the statements of Herodotus, and it is possible that much of Palestine, now withering under the bane of Turkish despotism, might revive with better and wiser treatment.

Mr. Rich[135] states that Babylonia “is not cultivated to above half the degree of which it is susceptible;” and General Chesney[136] says “that those portions of Mesopotamia which are still cultivated, as the country about Hillah, show that the region has all the fertility ascribed to it by Herodotus.”[137]

But though the Jewish trade under Solomon had reached proportions so unusually large, these soon fell away and dwindled almost to nothing under his successors. With his death came wars and divisions; Jehoshaphat lost his ships at Ezion-geber, the Edomites revolted, the Syrians under Rezin seized the port, till at length it fell into the more powerful grasp of Tiglath Pileser, who thus finally destroyed the only maritime career in which the Jewish people had ever taken an active or successful part.

Babylon.

There is reason to believe that it was not many years before the time of David that the great cities of Mesopotamia, strictly so called, Babylon, and Nineveh, made themselves known as commercial entrepôts, for the storing of goods on their way from the East to the West; and that at first, and for a considerable period, Babylon was of the two the most important. Placed advantageously so as to make available both the Euphrates and Tigris, Babylon secured easy communication with the interior of Asia, and was able, therefore, to supply all the surrounding populations with the produce of the far East. She soon became what the prophet calls her, “a land of traffic—a city of merchants,” partly, no doubt, because the navigation of the Persian Gulf presented fewer difficulties and dangers than that of the Red Sea, while her traders were largely aided by the Phœnician settlement of Tylos among the Bahrein Islands and by Gerrha, a port on the western shores of the Persian Gulf.[138]

In Babylon itself there were manufactories of cotton and linen, which, with the maritime imports not required for the use of the great city, were carried by water as far as Thapsacus and thence distributed by caravans all over Asia.

Gerrha and Tylos.

Gerrha was a place of large trade, and its merchants and ship-owners are probably as old as any recorded in history, for they were not merely the factors for the precious commodities of Asia and Europe, but, in conjunction with the Midianites and Edomites, conducted the first caravans on record. From the remotest times they carried on an extensive trade with the Phœnicians in spices and aromatics, and with Babylon in mineral salt and cotton, which the island of Tylos produced in great abundance. Indeed, the words of Herodotus in his first chapter clearly indicate the existence of such an ancient trade conducted by aid of the Phœnicians.

Babylonian commerce.

Though frequently interrupted by the great internal revolutions of Asia, in which Babylon was constantly compelled to take part, and though the trading routes between Babylon and Tyre lay through wild and inhospitable deserts, the intercourse between them continued for many centuries, nor ceased, so far as we know from history, till the final overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus and the Medes and Persians.

Of the objects of this commerce a tolerably certain account has been preserved; and among these are found corn (which has been supposed to be indigenous in Babylonia), dogs of an extraordinary breed, carpets, cotton and woollen fabrics, woven and embroidered with figures of mythic animals and famous alike for their texture and workmanship and for the richness and variety of their colours. These native products were exchanged for spices, ivory, ebony, cinnamon and precious stones. The sindones, or flowing garments, of Babylon had a great reputation from remote times, for it was “a goodly Babylonian garment,” which tempted Achan to his destruction (Josh. vii. v. 21); and, centuries after Babylon had almost ceased to be counted among the nations, an Edict of Diocletian, A.D. 284, the purpose of which was to regulate the maximum prices of articles in the empire, speaks of several products of Babylonian manufacture.[139]

Herodotus[140] has given a curious description of the boats seen by him when he was at Babylon—made of willows from Armenia, sewn round with hides, so that they must have as much resembled the Welsh coracles still in use, as they do some of the boats on the Assyrian monuments.

Assyrian boats.

If, indeed, we may assume that there was little difference between Assyrian and Babylonian boats, the recently disentombed monuments of Nineveh will afford excellent evidence of their character, whether for purposes of war or pleasure, and confirm remarkably the accuracy of the “Father of History.” Mr. Layard remarks, that vessels (or rather rafts) of an exactly similar construction were used by him for the conveyance of the sculptures he discovered, from Nimrúd to Bussorah. They were generally built of twigs and boughs, and covered with skins smeared with bitumen, to render them water-proof. Other boats represented on the sculptures would seem to have been constructed of planks of poplar, fastened together by wooden pins or trenails, and in some instances by iron nails. But, though using boats and rafts of a rude type for the conveyance of merchandise, there is no reason to suppose that either the Assyrians or the Babylonians had any naval tastes. Like the Egyptians and the Jews, when they wanted vessels of large dimension or strength, they had recourse to their Phœnician neighbours. Thus, Phœnician shipwrights built the vessels for Sennacherib’s invasion of Chaldæa; as they were said to have done for Semiramis.[141]

Again, Shalmaneser, when about to besiege Tyre, manned his ships with Phœnician sailors.[142]

It is probable that the vessels on the Assyrian sculptures range in date from Tiglath Pileser I., B.C. 1110, to nearly the fall of the empire, B.C. 625. The earliest are those of wicker work, covered with skins.

(Layard, II. Series, Pl. 28.)

On other sculptures we see:—

In one instance, where a huge carved block of stone is being moved (one of the great bulls weighing 10 tons), the boat is evidently a flat-bottomed barge or raft.

After the Cypriote expedition, the Assyrian boats show signs of improvement, hence a lighter and more ornamental class of vessel; one of the best has the prow in the form of a horse’s head.

Others have a broad top to their masts, not unlike the crow’s nest, visible in some of the medieval boats, represented on the Corporate seals of different English port towns.

Lastly, we find vessels wherein the oarsmen are obviously placed so as to row to the best advantage. The ships are generally biremes, with perhaps thirty rowers, and are decked.

On the deck of the second of these last illustrations two figures may be noticed with white head-dresses or veils; these are, no doubt, the wives who are accompanying their husbands in the expedition. The circular objects attached to the sides of the ships are probably the shields of the warriors. The rowers are evidently placed on a lower as well as on an upper deck.

(Layard, I. Series, Pl. 71.)

(Layard, I. Series, Pl. 71.)

No representations of naval engagements have as yet been met with on the Assyrian bas-reliefs, but they may be found hereafter.

The sculptures further show, contrary to what was long the received opinion, that the ancients possessed mechanical contrivances for diminishing manual labour, not unlike those now made use of. Indeed, the genius that planned and carried out the sculptures at Nineveh, might have been deemed equal to the knowledge of the pulley, or of the wheel and axle; and such we find to have been the case. In the museum at Leyden there exists a well made pulley, brought from Egypt; and on a bas-relief from Nineveh we clearly discern that the old mechanical contrivances differed inappreciably from those of modern days. Similar appliances would certainly have been adopted on shipboard, and ancient vessels must have been furnished with pulleys, or such other simple mechanical contrivances as were required for raising the anchor, hoisting heavy sails, or otherwise assisting manual labour.

In fact, the sculptures exhibit most of the common implements in actual use, as the saw, the pickaxe, the adze, and the handspike (or lever of the first class). Moreover, there are still preserved in the British Museum specimens of the metallic parts of all the above-named instruments.

Having called attention to the more important nations, the Tyrians, the Carthaginians, the Babylonians and the Assyrians, some other peoples who, in the ancient history of the world, played an important part, as maritime or naval states, require to be noticed, but more briefly.

Among these are the following: Lydia, Ionia, Caria, Phrygia, Sinope, Cilicia, and Scythia.

Lydia.

To take first Lydia. There can be no doubt that the Persians deemed the conquest of Lydia one of the most important of their achievements, in the erroneous belief that the Lydians were a great naval power. The Lydians had a navy, and may have built it themselves (though Heeren thinks not); but their real wealth lay in the great power of their capital, Sardes,[143] and in the fertility of the plains above and below it. The city has well nigh perished, but the meadows, once her joy, still retain their marvellous luxuriance. Moreover, that Lydia was very early a state unusually rich, may be inferred from the gold coins still occasionally found there. These, it is now believed, are the oldest specimens of coined money, a fact affording a striking proof of the accuracy of Herodotus,[144] who, as a Greek, would naturally have given the first origin of coinage to Argos, or to some other Greek state.

Ionia.

Next in order, as memorable for their sea-faring and trading abilities, are the inhabitants of Phocæa, Ephesus, and Smyrna, who long contested with the Phœnicians the supremacy of the Archipelago; cities too, which, in a humbler degree, would seem to have worked out an inter-commercial system, much resembling the Hanseatic League of later days.

Caria.

Phrygia.

Miletus, again, as the capital of Caria, achieved no small maritime renown, and was the parent of colonies maintaining their sway for centuries along the inhospitable shores of the northern side of the Black Sea. “Her extensive commerce,” says Heeren, “was not confined to the Mediterranean, but sought to monopolize the navigation of the Euxine and of the Sea of Azov.”[145] Again, Phrygia, one of the earliest commercial populations of Asia Minor, was famous for its capital, Celænæ, a great internal entrepôt, and, in a less degree, for the possession of Sinope, itself a colony of Miletus, and a port which until now has attracted to itself a very considerable trade with the populations on the shores of the Black Sea.

Scythians.

The Scythians, with boundaries perfectly undefinable, but who may be roughly described as the inhabitants of the great Steppe country, now known as Little Russia, and of the districts north of Circassia, for centuries played an important part in the commerce of the ancient world. Though chiefly nomads, they were also, to a great extent, carriers by land, while no inconsiderable section of their population devoted itself to agriculture. Strangely, however, they cultivated, not that they might themselves enjoy the produce, but that they might sell it to other nations. From the same districts, embracing Odessa, and from the ports of the Sea of Azov, vast quantities of corn are still annually imported into England.[146]

Nor was this all: like the modern inhabitants of the eastern shores of the Black Sea, the Scythians were also notorious for their extensive traffic in slaves, the countries situated to the north and east of this inland lake affording then, as now, inexhaustible magazines for this lucrative branch of commerce: they at the same time extended thence their trading operations far into the interior of Asia. “As far as the Argyppæi” (the modern Calmucks), says Herodotus,[147] “the country is well known; and also that of the other nations which we have mentioned before. For it is often visited either by the Scythians, of whom inquiry may easily be made, or by the Greeks of the commercial towns on the Borysthenes [Dnieper] and Pontus. The Scythians who go into these districts usually carry on their affairs in seven different languages, by the assistance of the same number of interpreters.”

Their caravan routes.

The Scythian caravans probably crossed the southern end of the Ural mountains, and passed on, round the Caspian Sea, to Great Mongolia and the Sea of Aral. Travelling with immense herds and numerous beasts of burden, they were able to conduct with advantage the overland trade through Asia Minor; following, during part of their journeys, a road which Herodotus carefully describes and to which reference will hereafter be made.

Herodotus states that their principal trade was in furs, and that it had been carried on from time immemorial. They also probably dealt largely in horses,[148] and other beasts of burden, and exchanged the manufactures of the West for such animals, and for furs and metals of various kinds, including gold, which was apparently to be procured in considerable quantities.

To India, via the Caspian.

These routes, as well as those through Bactra (Balkh) and Maracanda (Samarcand), the two principal marts for Indian merchandise, were all in connection with the Caspian Sea, across which, Herodotus informs us, there existed an organised system of navigation.[149] On this point Heeren remarks:[150] “In the Macedonian period, the productions of India and Bactra were carried down the Oxus to the Caspian Sea; then over this sea to the mouths of the Araxes and Cyrus; after that by land to the Phasis, where they were once again conveyed by water to the different cities on the coast of the Euxine Sea.”[151]

By means such as these, the chief trade between the western shores of the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, and the East was carried on during the earliest periods of history. Babylon, Susa, and Nineveh, on the one hand, with David and Solomon on the other, having been the chief causes alike of its early success and of its vast extension.