Indo-roman trade- (Maritime)

In india, serious investigation into Indo-Roman Sea trade started with the first discoveries, of Imperial
Roman coins in peninsular India in the late 18th century. Subsequently, scholars began to focus on
locating, on Indian maps, the trade-ports and coastal market-towns listed in the Periplus and
Geographia. The Indian literary sources (mainly the Jatakas and Tamil Sangam poetry) were also
researched from the point of view of historical geography. By the beginning of the present century,
numismatic studies on Roman coinage in India and documentation of historical geographers had
become substantial enough to prompt the first histories of early Egypt-India trade. In 1945 the
archaeologist Mortimer Wheeler opened yet another dimension in investigations into Indo-Roman
trade when he excavated the coastal site of Arikamedu in Pondicherry. The Arikamedu excavation
yielded the first Mediterranean ceramics (amphora, Arretine Ware) from controlled stratified
contexts. Since the excavation of Arikamedu, more than a dozen major excavations at sites all over
peninsular India have yielded Mediterranean artefacts (glassware, bronzes, lamps, camcos, beads).
Across the Indian ocean lands (red sea littoral, Gulf of Aden region, Persian Gulf, southeast asia)
recent archaeological fieldwork has also generated considerable evidence of roman commercial
voyaging in the orient.

At what point does Roman participation in the Indian Ocean trade appear to peak in the first three
centuries of the first millennium AD? It has been argued by many scholars on the basis of the
archaeological evidence seen from sites across Egypt, East Africa, the southern Arabian Peninsula
and India that this peak appears to occur during the first century. On the basis the construction
activity in the Eastern Desert, and also on heavily contested numismatic evidence from India, that
this peak is most apparent in the latter part of the first century to 3rd century AD.

The unification of the areas around the Mediterranean under the Roman Empire in the first century
BC and its gradual expansion to include territories at the mouth of the Red Sea led to a greater
intervention by Roman subjects from Alexandria and the eastern Mediterranean in the maritime
trade, which had hitherto been handled by the Arab and Indian merchants. It brought because the
Persian Gulf, the Red sea, the Mediterranean and the Indian ocean closer to each other. Red sea
became a regular trade channel with india. Asia minor and arabia connected Mediterranean with
India by land routes as well.

Long before Hippalus theorising the Monsoon Wind, ancient seafarers had awareness about
latitudinal parallels and corresponding destinations, as part of their traditional working knowledge of
contemporary overseas navigators. They knew that sailing from the horn of Africa across the Arabian
Sea by navigating the 12° latitude east would take them to the southern west coast of India.
Merchants used traveled from the Nile to Kena and Keft. After seven days at sea, they reached the
Heroopolit Gulf, eventually arriving at Berenice and the harbor of Mussel. Unfamiliar with the
monsoon winds, sailing along the coastal lines merchant ships often ended up at Ras Fartak and the
mouth of the Indus. During their journey, they made stops at Adulis and Massowa for African cargo,
and after stopping east of Muza, they reached Ocelis. Crossing the Bab-el-Mandeb strait, they
entered the Indian Ocean. In the Somali markets at Aden and Socotra, they encountered Indian
merchants. Sailing directly from Cane and Moza, they arrived at the port at the mouth of the Indus,
where they received cargoes from China, Tibet, and India. Continuing their voyage, they reached
Broach and proceeded to Muziris and Kottayam.
According to Pliny, the southwest monsoon enabled merchants travelling from the Red Sea ports to
depart in July and reach the Indian coast around the latter half of September, and then with the
northeast monsoon start the return journey around the end of December to early January.

Bharuch lay in its strategic location at the northern tip of the west coast providing an outlet both for
the settlements of the Deccan and the cities of north India such as Ujjain, Vidisha and Mathura. The
Periplus mentions a route from Bharuch via Ujjain to modern Charsada in the north-west. This is
corroborated by Buddhist literature which refers to the journey of the horse-dealers of Taxila to
Ujjain. South of Bharuch were a series of ports- the major ones being at Sopara, Kalyan and Chaul.

The Periplus gives a list of goods exported to the Roman empire from Indian ports on the Indus delta
and the Gujarat coast. Bharuch exported spikenard, costus, ivory, agate, cotton cloth, slik cloth, yarn,
long pepper and other articles brought to the port from various market towns of india and imported
wine, copper, tin and lead, coral and topaz; muslin, flit glass, gold and silver coins and ointments.
Bharuch had very intimate trade relation with Paithan and Ter. According to Periplus they sent out a
large quantity of carnelian, various kind of muslin and mallow cloth. In the time of periplus Kalyan
was perhaps under the control of Kshatrapas and therefore, the prohibition of any trade from this
port. South of the kalyan other ports were always under the fear of pirates. Kerala exported large
quantities of black pepper. In Muziris the arab and Roman ships exchanged Indian goods with Roman
goods. They also made transactions in cash. It is also said that a temple was erected here in honour
of Augustus.

Evidences-

There was close trade relation between south india and rome which is supported by the finds of
many roman coins in that region. These coins were not used as currency but for their metal value
only. In the Indian subcontinent there are around 170 recorded finds of Roman coins dating from
Augustus to early third century, and these are spread over about 130 sites. Two regions, in particular,
show major concentrations of Roman coins. The first concentration is of primarily Julio-Claudian
denarii around the Coimbatore district (Tamilnadu) in southern India. The second is in the areas
around the Krishna River in Andhra Pradesh (eastern India), consisting predominantly of post-Julio-
Claudian aurei. Some of these coins have features such as slash marks and punch-marks, while
imitation coins, both high quality and base metals coated by silver, have been found. Most of these
features and imitations are generally thought to originate in India. Although some Roman coins have
been found at sites in western India, for example, near Sholapur, Waghoda, they are relatively few in
number. Apart from a handful of finds at sites such as Taxila, Manikyala, and Mathura, scarcely any
Roman coins have been found in north India. While the Kushanas may well have melted down and
re-minted Roman gold coins, this does not explain the virtual absence of silver coins in the north.
Only one coin hoard of gold aurei has been reported in eastern India (in Singhbhum).

Apart from coins, valuable information regarding Indo-Mediterranean contacts comes from pottery.
The two types of Roman pottery found in India are amphorae jars and terra sigillata. Rouletted ware
is a pottery with a smooth surface and usually a metallic lustre, with concentric bands of rouletted
designs. Pottery of this type found at several Indian sites, especially in eastern and south-eastern
India was once thought to be a foreign ware; however, it is now considered to be locally produced.

Brahmapuri, in Maharashtra, yielded a large hoard of ‘Roman’ bronzes,including a statuette of

Poseidon, the Roman sea god. Suresh points out that the distribution pattern of Roman artefacts in
India indicates that while the trade was initially concentrated on the western coast, the Coromanadel
coast soon became more important. Excavations at Berenike on the Egyptian coast, which have
yielded black pepper and beads of South Indian and Sri Lankan manufacture in a 4th century CE
context, reflect the flourishing East–West trade. The extent of social demand for oriental goods is
best expressed in Pliny’s reference to the growing anxiety of the Roman Senate about the drain of
gold due to the regular import of pepper and other spices from the East which is famous and widely
cited as proof of the influx of gold in bullion and as coins to the Indian west coast.

Gurukkal argue that the expression, ‘Indo-Roman trade’ popularised by Indian historiography is a
mistake, for what had happened was literally Roman trade with India having little or no role in it and
therefore, at best it can be expressed as Roman–Indian trade. What emerges out of a critical
examination of recent archaeological discoveries at ancient port sites of Egyptian desert and the
Indian west coast besides the extant sources is that classical Roman–Indian trade was an exchange of
serious imbalance quite natural to the transactions between an Empire and a region of chiefdoms.
However, it is not unlikely that some Tamils had accompanied the traders in the Arab or
Mediterranean ships, perhaps as merchant middlemen and providers of trade goods and services on
board, for it would not have necessitated organisational and institutional capabilities.

Southeast trade-

The great expansion of Southeast Asian, and particularly of Island-Mainland exchange which is
evident in later prehistory is closely connected with lndo-Roman commerce and can be explained by
a rising demand for exotic and prestigious items of consumption and adornment in the sophisticated
urban civilizations of the Mediterranean basin, India and, China. As an example of this demand for
exotic products we need to look at spice trade particularly at clove, the unopened flower buds of the
tree eugenia aromatica, kuntze whose home was restricted to the Moluccas. It was the spice trade
which was particularly responsible for the “Indianization” of the souteast asia.

The important recent finds of early Indian or Western Classical antiquities in Southeast Asia are
these:

 A copper coin of the Western Roman Emperor Victorinus (AD 268-70), minted at Cologne
and found at U-Thong in Western Thailand.
 Indian ivory comb from the moated settlement at Chansen in Central Thailand dated
between 1-3rd century AD
 A few sherds of lndo-Roman Rouletted Ware of the 1st century AD
 Some seals with Pallava inscriptions. Some of these seals are purely Classical while others are
undoubtedly Indian.

For a long time, Indian historians tended to view India’s relations with Southeast Asia through the
perspective of a political and cultural colonization of the latter. More sober re-assessments have
examined the reciprocal links between India and Southeast Asia from a more objective and long-term
perspective. (Indianization debate)- if needed

R.C Majumdar- colonies of india

N.J Krom- trade and commerce

Herman kulke- parallel state (legitimacy- brahmin marrying a local princess)

o.w walter, w.mabbett- indigeneous contribution

Ancient Sanskrit and Pali texts refer to a land known as Suvarnadvipa or Suvarnabhumi— usually
identified with Southeast Asia. According to HP Ray, there is archaeological evidence of maritime
links between India and both coastal and inland Southeast Asia from c. 500/400 BCE onward.
However, in the 1st century CE, there was an increase in the quantity and variety of Indian items
exported from India to Southeast Asia. The background to this change was the emergence of
kingdoms in mainland Southeast Asia.

The influence of Indian Hindu-Buddhist civilization in Southeast Asia from the·middle of the first
millennium AD is undeniable and found almost everywhere except in the remote and forested
interior of the mainland or in the eastern islands of Indonesia and the Philippines. From this time on
we have numerous religious monuments and icons, the latter imported from India or modelled on
Indian prototypes; evidence for the use of Indian scripts and languages, at least for political and
religious propaganda. That lndianization in Southeast Asia was closely linked to trade seems clear
from the elusive Indian historical and mythological sources.

On the basis of literary and archaeological evidence, the following list of exports from Southeast Asia
to India can be compiled: gold, spices such as cinnamon and cloves, aromatics, sandalwood, and
camphor. Some of these items were shipped on to Western markets from India, as there was a
demand for them in the Mediterranean region as well. It is also possible that tin was exported to the
subcontinent from the Malay peninsula. Exports from India to Southeast Asia included cotton cloth,
sugar, beads, and certain kinds of pottery. The trade was clearly not confined to luxury goods.

Voyaging to Suvarnabhumi the fabled Land of Gold was a hazardous undertaking and shipwreck,
ordeal by scorching sun, tempest, hunger and thirst,as well as plagues of serpents and insects are
among the perils to be expected by travellers. It is clear that these were speculative mercantile
voyages for commercial profit. As a later writer put it "Who goes to Java, never returns. If by chance
he returns then he brings back enough money to support seven generations of his family".

Silk trade route-

The great Chinese silk route connected India with central asia, west asia and Europe. This route
strectched from Loyang on the yellow river to Ctesiphon on tigris river in west asia. From Loyang it
went to tunhuang and bifurcated into northern and a southern segment. Both route met at Kashgar,
only to split into two. The northern route went to the Caspian sea and was main route to Persia. The
southern route went to Bactria and joined up at merv. From afgh, a route ran through Kabul valley to
the north-western cities of the subcontinent and further inland. Another route from Kashgar ran
through gilgit in Kashmir. North-west india became an important junction for trade between china
and roman empire. The important items transported from or through India to China during this
period were pearls, coral, glass, and fragrances. Silk was the major Chinese export to India.