If, Therefore, There Are No Proofs Or Traces Of A Direct And Regular Trade With India In Their Time, We May Safely Conclude It Did Not Exist In Egypt, Previously To The Conquest Of That Country By The Romans.

We are well aware, that there are great authorities opposed to the opinion which we hold; but these authorities

Are modern; they are not, we think, supported by the ancient writers, and in opposition to them, we can place the authority of Dr. Vincent, a name of the very greatest weight in questions of this nature. The authorities we alluded to in support of the opinion, that there was a direct trade with India under the Ptolemies, are Huet, in his History of the Commerce and Navigation of the Ancients; Dr. Robertson, in his Disquisition on India, and Harris, or perhaps, more properly speaking, Dr. Campbell, in his edition of Harris's Collection of Voyages and Travels. Huet, as is justly remarked by Dr. Vincent, drops the prosecution of the question at the very point he ought to introduce it; and afterwards countenances, or seems to countenance, the opposite opinion. Dr. Robertson bestows much labour, ingenuity, and learning in support of the opinion, that under the Ptolemies, a direct trade was carried on with India; yet, after all, he concludes in this manner: "it is probable that their voyages were circumscribed within very narrow limits, and that under the Ptolemies no considerable progress was made in the discovery of India:" and when he comes to the discovery of the Monsoon by Hippalus and the consequent advantage taken of it to trade directly to India, by sailing from shore to shore, he acknowledges that all proofs of a more early existence of such a trade are wanting. Dr. Campbell virtually gives up his support of the opinion, that a direct trade was carried on under the Ptolemies, in the same manner.

We have already remarked, that the strongest spirit of enterprize that distinguished Egypt existed in the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus and Ptolemy Euergetes; that these monarchs pushed their discoveries, and extended their commercial connections much farther than any of their predecessors; and that therefore, if a direct and regular communication between Egypt and India did not take place in their reigns, we may be assured it was unknown to the Egyptians at the period of the Roman conquest. To their reigns, then, we shall principally direct our enquiries.

That Ptolemy Philadelphus was extremely desirous to improve the navigation of the Red Sea, is evident from his having built Myos Hormos, or rather improved it, because it was more convenient than Arsinoe, on account of the difficulty of navigating the western extremity of that sea: he afterwards fixed on Berenice in preference to Myos Hormos, when the navigation and commerce on this sea was extended and improved, since Berenice being lower down, the navigation towards the straits was shorter, as well as attended with fewer difficulties and dangers. But there is no evidence that his fleets, which sailed from Berenice, were destined for India, or even passed the Straits of Babelmandeb.

Enter page number Go  Previous Next
Page 88 of 524
Words from 45710 to 46227 of 273188