History of merchant shipping and ancient commerce, Volume 1 (of 4)

by W. S. Lindsay

The Veneti on the coast of Gaul.

In the reign of Diocletian events somewhat similar occurred. The Britons again revolted; Egypt was again the scene of fresh discord and confusion, and though the various attempts to throw off the Roman yoke still proved abortive, the general decline of intellectual power among the Roman people became so apparent that fresh enemies arose against her in almost every quarter. The Veneti, who, four centuries before, had given Julius Cæsar[332] no little trouble ere he reduced them to subjection, perceiving the weakness of Rome and the impunity with which her territory had been ravaged by the Northern hordes, rose in arms against her, and exercising an arbitrary dominion over the seas that washed their coasts, exacted tribute from all strangers, and for a while successfully bade defiance to Rome, whose mariners dreaded the navigation of the Bay of Biscay.

Constantinople founded, A.D. 323.

Its commercial advantages, and harbour.

The reign, too, of Diocletian, who seems to have had an especial dislike for Rome and the senate, saw the commencement of a new system of imperial government, which, afterwards more fully developed by Constantine, led to the removal of the chief seat of government to Constantinople, a change which exerted a vast influence on commerce, and essentially altered the course of navigation. The splendid position of Constantinople, especially for all purposes of sea-borne trade, has been fully noticed by every author who has treated of this subject; and it seems probable that, when brought into communication with the whole of Europe, by means of the railways now fast approaching completion, it will rival in greatness any commercial city of the continent. The new route to India by way of the Suez canal, of which advantage will, no doubt, be taken by the establishment of a line of steamers to Port Said, cannot fail to afford it such facilities for becoming a great depôt for the produce of the East Indies, that it will be the fault of its government and of its merchants if it does not again assume and surpass the rank it held soon after its re-construction by Constantine the Great. Gibbon’s description of its position is as applicable now as ever.[333] “The imperial city,” he remarks, “may be represented under that of an unequal triangle. The obtuse point, which advances towards the east and the shores of Asia, meets and repels the waves of the Thracian Bosphorus. The northern side of the city is bounded by the harbour; and the southern is washed by the Propontis, or Sea of Marmora: the basis of the triangle is opposed to the west, and terminates the continent of Europe.”

“The epithet of ‘golden’ in ‘Golden Horn,’” he adds, “was expressive of the riches which every wind wafted from the most distant countries into the secure and capacious port of Constantinople. The river Lycus, formed by the conflux of two little streams, pours into the harbour a perpetual supply of fresh water, which serves to cleanse the bottom, and to invite the periodical shoals of fish to seek their retreat in that convenient recess. As the vicissitudes of the tides are scarcely felt in those seas, the constant depth of the harbour allows goods to be landed on the quays without the assistance of boats; and it has been observed that, in many places, the largest vessels may rest their prows against the houses, while the sterns are floating on the water. From the mouth of the Lycus to that of the harbour this arm of the Bosphorus is more than seven miles in length. The entrance is about five hundred yards broad, and a chain could be occasionally drawn across it to guard the port and city from the attack of a hostile navy.”

The extent of its ancient trade.

The Hellespont, in its winding course, is about sixty miles in length, with an average breadth of three miles; its lower end, where Xerxes is believed to have built his bridge of boats, is celebrated as the spot where Leander, in ancient times, is said to have swum across, and which has, in modern days, been certainly so crossed by Byron,[334] Ekenhead, Colquhoun, and others. Altogether Constantinople would seem to have been formed by nature as an important entrepôt for commerce; and this was peculiarly the case in ancient times, as caravan routes placed it in communication, not merely with the cities of Mesopotamia, but also with those on the Indus and the Ganges, thus securing for it the trade with the Euxine and the Caspian, and even the silk trade of China. With the Bosphorus and the Hellespont for its gates, whoever secures possession of these important passages can always shut them against a naval enemy, and open them to the peaceable fleets of commerce.

Black Sea and Sea of Azov.

Although the trade of the Black Sea was considerable, even in remote times, it greatly increased after the foundation of Constantinople. Across this sea a large portion of the goods of Asia found their way; while gold from Colchis; and from the surrounding coasts, corn, leather, flax, honey, wax, flocks of sheep and goats, furs, medicinal herbs, and timber suitable for ship-building, found a ready mart in the markets of the new city. The fisheries of the Euxine and the Bosphorus still maintained their ancient reputation. Sturgeon and tunny-fish, abundant in the Black Sea,[335] had, of old, fetched excessive prices in Greece and Italy, and, under the Greek emperors, contributed largely to the revenues of the state. The city of Byzantium, also, raised large sums annually from dues levied on shipping passing through the Straits.