In ancient times territories on both sides of the Aden Gulf produced and traded large quantities of incense and fragrant woods. Since the time of the Pharaoh Queen Hatshepsut, the Egyptians had used the Red Sea to bypass Nubia and deal directly with Somalia (1473-1458 BC). This was the route chosen by the Ptolemais when they established new Red Sea ports to stage elephant hunting expeditions down the east coast of Africa (283-217 BC). From the Augustan era onwards Rome dominated Red Sea trade and most East African products entered the Empire through these sea-lanes. Strabo confirms that ‘at the present time most aromatics are transported via the Nile to Alexandria’.1 Beyond Ethiopia, the Romans called Somalia and the Horn of Africa the ‘Far-Side’ since in their terms this coast faced Arabia.
With sea transport nearly thirty times less expensive than land haulage, the Red Sea route was the most advantageous course for Roman merchants to make direct contact with markets in Sub-Saharan Africa.2 Furthermore, Roman ships making voyages to East Africa did not need to be large vessels in order to make a substantial profit from this commerce. A cargo-hold filled with just 30 tons of frankincense could be worth more than a million sesterces in Roman markets.3 There were probably more than a hundred ships involved in this commerce since Strabo mentions large fleets bound for Somalia and India in the same sentence. He confirms that ‘at this present time large fleets are sent as far as India and the extremities of Africa, from which the most valuable cargoes are brought to
Egypt’.
Roman ships entering the Indian Ocean attempted only one sailing per year when the seasonal monsoon winds favoured relatively safe, fast travel. Wind conditions permitted Roman ships to make voyages down the African coast anytime from January to September, but most vessels sailing to Somalia sailed in September, nearly two months after their colleagues had left for India.5 This schedule meant they could dominate loading activities at the Egyptian Red Sea ports during the month of August. It also allowed a prompt return when the incoming northeast monsoon reached east Africa in November.
Below Egypt, the African shoreline of the Red Sea was largely desolate. The seaboard was fronted by a thirty-mile wide stretch of coast that was generally unsuitable for agriculture. The native peoples occupying this region tended to be coastal fishermen, or inland hunter-gatherer nomads subject to local chiefs. The Periplus describes how the Ichthyophagoi (Fish-eaters) occupied the coastline, ‘living in scattered groups in primitive huts built in limited areas’. Inland regions were ‘inhabited by Barbaroi (Barbarians) and beyond them, Agriophagoi (Wild-animal-eaters) and Moschophagoi (Foliage-eaters) who are organised in chief-doms’. Roman sailors called this part of Africa ‘the Country of the Barbaroi’ or the ‘Troglodytes’.6 Somewhere inland was the metropolis of Meroe, but this Nilotic kingdom had no trade presence on the Red Sea coast.
Roman ships sailing 450 miles down the Barbaroi coast reached the first African trade-station at Ptolemais Theron (Ptolemais of the Hunts).7 This outpost was founded as a hunting-station by the Hellenic King Ptolemy II Phila-delphus (283-246 BC) who sent expeditions of Greek mercenaries into the region to capture live elephants. A Greek general named Eumedes established Ptolemais Theron as a defensive outpost and enclosed a rare stretch of arable land suitable for farming. At first the Greek intrusion was opposed by the local African population, but Eumedes was able to win their support. Strabo describes how, ‘unannounced, Eumedes built a ditch and wall across the peninsula. Then, by his courteous treatment of those who tried to hinder his work, he persuaded them to be his friends instead of his foes’.8 When the Greek hunters had decimated the nearby elephant herds, they moved their base-camps to more distant coasts. Sometime after this Theron fell back under the control of the local population.
The history of Theron was known to the author of the Periplus who reports that, ‘in the days of the Ptolemies, the royal huntsmen made their way inland lirom this site’. However, by the Roman period there were no elephant herds nearby and ivory could only occasionally be found at the settlement. The Periplus describes Theron as ‘a small port of trade’ and explains that ‘the place has no harbour and only offers refuge to small craft’. The main product on offer was turtle-shell obtained by offshore fishing, and a limited amount of small light-coloured tortoise shields gathered from local land hunts.9 Few Roman ships stopped at Theron and the Periplus does not recommend any cargo suitable for trade ashore. Pliny estimated that Ptolemy Theron was on the same latitude as Meroe, but the two sites were not connected by any significant trade routes.
World History
