The 'Myth' of the Silk Road

[Michael Kerr]

 Although in fragments Isidore of Charax wrote Parthian Stations an itinerary of an overland route from Antioch to India with a list of caravan stations maintained by the Parthians. Supposedly written a bit after 26BC the route probably marks an ancient trade route of the Medes and Assyrians located north of the Persian Royal Road. It was basically the same route followed by Maes' agents.

 I think one of the reasons merchants and cities were looking for alternative routes was competition and jealousy among Roman eastern cities. Alexandria, Tyre, Sidon and Palmyra all competing for trade which is mentioned in Young's book as well as MP Charlesworth in his book which I must admit is pretty old (1924) Trade Routes and Commerce of the Roman Empire. I agree that sea travel comprised a large share of trade of goods between China, India and the Mediterranean but overland trade still played its part. The Tarim city-states did not accept Chinese coins as currency for food, horses or jade until China slowly bought them under heel after expelling the Hsiung-nu but accepted silk which was bartered for goods the people of the Tarim needed like minerals and metals from Dzungaria, foodstuffs for some of them, leather and textiles like cotton from India. Here is a map I copied from the book "The Spice Trade of the Roman Empire" which although a modern representation show how many alternate routes, both sea and land or a combination of both there were available.

   


 Sea travel had its own perils for merchants and mariners. These were the days before the invention of the caravel which could "beat to the wind". Ships had to rely on the Etesian winds blowing them down the Red Sea on journeys that took about 30 days and then they had the perils of treacherous reefs near the straits then pull into ports for goods to trade and also fill up with fresh water for a 40 day ride on the Summer Monsoon winds to the coast of India which were rough and wet and then repair boats and rigging, sail up the Indian coast, stock up with goods and fresh water and wait for the return journey in winter which unlike the Mediterranean had gentler winds. It was best not to sail at all in the hottest months June, July and August.

 It is possible that the Antun delegation, 166AD and the one in 284AD missions may have been made by sea because Rome was at war with Parthia and the Sassanids and the overland route could have been blocked and the 226 mission by Lun or Leon came at a time of great instability for everyone (see below). Han general Ban Chao sent an envoy Gan Ying to make contact with the Romans in 97AD but he was supposedly scared off by the Parthians. It does seem co-incidental that Maes sent agents to China 4 years later so he may have had information from Parthian contacts about Han attempts at contact.

 I think all forms of trade, maritime and overland, between east and west took a big hit in the 3rd century when many established empires and kingdoms collapsed.

220AD Han empire destroyed by civil war in China.

224AD Parthian empire overthrown by Sassanids.

220s Satavahana Kingdom disintegrates.

230AD Kushan Empire collapses in Central Asia.

Southern India was in turmoil and the Cheran and Pandian dynasties that ruled Tamil India were destroyed by conflict around this time.

235-284AD Roman empire entered "Crisis of the Third Century" with 25 claimants over 50 year period.

Regards

Michael Kerr