Earliest caravan trade—Ophir—Port of Ezion-geber—The
voyages of the Jewish ships—The inland commerce of
Solomon—Babylon—Gerrha and Tylos—Babylonian commerce—Assyrian
boats—Lydia—Ionia—Caria—Phrygia—Scythians—Their caravan routes to
India, _viâ_ the Caspian.
[Sidenote: Earliest caravan trade.]
Reference has already incidentally been made to a few of the caravan
routes of very ancient times: these and other more important routes
will now and hereafter be considered somewhat more in detail, as,
antecedently to the invention of boats, there must have existed some
interchange of commodities between different nations and tribes on
land, by the agencies of different kinds of beasts of burthen; and,
here, the records of Holy Writ are, as in so many other cases, the
first available; the earliest caravan noticed in history being that
mentioned in the 37th chapter of the book of Genesis, v. 25: “behold,
a company of Ishmaelites came from Gilead with their camels bearing
spicery and balm and myrrh, going to carry it down to Egypt;” and
again, v. 28: “Then there passed by Midianites merchantmen; and they
drew and lifted up Joseph out of the pit, and sold Joseph to the
Ishmaelites for twenty pieces of silver.”
Here there is a clearly defined trade at a very remote period of
authentic history, and one which there is no reason to suppose was even
then new or unusual.
Moreover, a somewhat subsequent statement, “all countries came into
Egypt to Joseph for to buy corn” (Gen. xli. 57), proves that Egypt was
already what it remained for many centuries, the granary of adjacent,
and even of distant nations; while some of the goods she received from
Palestine in exchange were in great demand for the embalmment of the
Egyptian dead.
This the first regular trade appears to have been conducted wholly
by camels, the “ships of the desert:” an animal marvellously adapted
by Providence for the toil it has to undergo in traversing for many
continuous days almost waterless deserts.
It is worthy of note, too, that in the earliest notice we have of any
trade at all, we find slave-dealing in full operation; and, supposing
for a moment the Biblical date B.C. 1862 to be correct, it is an
interesting though accidental coincidence, that in the year 1862
_after_ Christ, the same inhuman commerce was finally put a stop to in
the United States by the direct action of its government.
But the brief words of Genesis imply more than is at first obvious—they
imply a trade with Arabia—possibly even with the yet more remote
India; for balsam and myrrh are products of the Arabian province,
Hadramaut, and the spices may have come either thence or from India.
In like manner there is reasonable probability for believing that in
the remotest ages there was a trade between Egypt and the borders
of the Persian Gulf and Indian Oceans; indeed, recent researches
strongly lead to the belief that the Egyptians, like the Phœnicians,
were immigrants from the same neighbourhood, and connected, therefore,
with the chief cities of Chaldæa, such as “Ur of the Chaldees,” the
primitive Babel, and other sites, the great mounds of which have been
partially explored by Loftus and Taylor, though it is not as yet
possible in all cases to assign to them their true ancient names.
Babylon, the great city of Nebuchadnezzar, did not then exist, nor
could Nineveh have been of importance, at least commercially. All the
evidence available, and especially that obtainable through the latest
interpretation of the Cuneiform Inscriptions, tends to show that the
greatest people in the earliest period were the Chaldæans—a race
probably older than the Egyptians, and like them of Hamite origin—the
true inventors of alphabetic writing, astronomy, agriculture,
navigation, and of other sciences, which the Semites, in after days,
claimed as their own exclusive discoveries.
It was in connexion with this trade that the ports at the head of the
Ælanitic gulf came first into existence. As the caravans of Edom or
Idumæa passed to and fro between Egypt and the borders of Arabia, the
foundation of Elath and Ezion-geber would be but the satisfying of a
necessary want; becoming, when seized by King David, places of much
greater importance than they could have been in the hands of Hadad, or
of any other petty Idumæan prince.
[Sidenote: Ophir.]
David would seem to have been the first, in connection with caravans
from Petra and from the west, to open up, by means of a line of ships,
that trade with “Ophir” which his son Solomon afterwards made so
famous. Where and what “Ophir” was, has been the subject of innumerable
essays by men of learning, but to enter into a discussion of this
uncertain though interesting inquiry, would be out of our province.
Let it suffice that the first notice in the Bible[127] clearly means
by “Ophir” someplace in Arabia, where great wealth was found, and
was no doubt applicable afterwards to all other similar places.
Those writers who, relying on the native Indian names of some of the
products said to have come thence, assert Ophir to be the name of a
people near the mouths of the Indus, advance opinions more ingenious
than convincing. If Ophir were an Arabian entrepôt for the trade of
India, the occurrence of Indian names for certain Indian products
would be as natural as the use in English of the Persian word _shâl_,
which we pronounce as they do, “shawl.” Then David’s “gold of Ophir”
may have been simply descriptive of quality, as we used to speak of
“guinea-gold.”[128]
Be this, however, as it may, it is certain that to David the Jews owe
their first practical knowledge of the result of successful commerce,
though a careful consideration of the story of his life suggests that
his coffers were filled, not so much by any legitimate trade, however
extended, as by the conquest and plunder of his neighbours. Though
probably not averse to royal monopolies, the fashion of his day, David
was a great warrior, and it is likely, indeed it is so stated on more
than one occasion, that it was by the capture of Philistine (Phœnician)
towns, the overthrow of Moab, the plunder of Hadadezer, the
garrisoning of Syria and of its chief city, Damascus, and the extortion
of heavy tribute as the condition of peace, that David accumulated
the enormous wealth which he proposed devoting to the building and
decoration of the future Temple at Jerusalem:[129] but God said, “Thou
shalt not build an house unto my name, because thou hast shed much
blood upon the earth in my sight.”[130]
To Solomon more strictly belongs the great commercial results of a long
and peaceful reign, materially aided as this was by the king’s personal
superintendence, by his visits to Elath and Ezion-geber, by his treaty
of amity, mutual forbearance, and important commercial arrangements
with Hiram, King of Tyre, and last, not least, by the extraordinary
fame he thus obtained, leading, to the memorable visit to him by the
Queen of Sheba, and to the display of his wisdom and wealth, till she
felt, on beholding them, that “there was no more spirit in her.”[131]
[Sidenote: Port of Ezion-geber.]
Dean Stanley, in his “Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church,”
has eloquently described the position of Solomon’s chief port, where,
he says,[132] “Ezion-geber, the ‘Giant’s backbone,’ so called,
probably, from the huge range of mountains on each side of it, became
an emporium teeming with life and activity; the same, on the eastern
branch, that Suez has, in our own time, become on the western branch
of the Red Sea. Beneath that line of palm trees which now shelters the
wretched village of Akaba, was then heard the stir of ship-builders
and sailors. Thence went forth the fleet of Solomon, manned by Tyrian
sailors, to Ophir, in the far East, on the coast of India or Arabia.
From Arabia also, near or distant, came a constant traffic of spices,
both from private individuals and from the chiefs. So great was
Solomon’s interest in these, that he actually travelled himself to the
gulf of Akaba to see the port.”
It appears that the fleets though manned by Tyrian sailors, were under
charge of Jewish supercargoes, who were responsible for the stores
and merchandise, and conducted all the trading operations. This happy
alliance materially extended the commerce of both countries; for
shut out from the Mediterranean by the inefficiency of the ports of
Palestine, and with no communication with the Indian Ocean, except by
caravans traversing the Arabian desert, the Jewish people could in no
other way have derived material advantages from the valuable and much
coveted trade of the East. For the first time, too, the trade of Europe
was opened to the Jews through their connexion with the Tyrians; while,
on the other hand, the merchants of Tyre found in Israel a large and
lucrative field for the full development of their commerce.
[Sidenote: The voyages of the Jewish ships.]
So far as can now be ascertained, the joint fleets of Hiram and
Solomon sailed periodically from the Ælanitic or Akaba gulf, for
the East, somewhere between November and March, when the winds are
favourable for a voyage down the Red Sea. Thence, probably, a portion
of the ships shaped their course for the south-east shores of Africa,
from the straits of Bab-el-Mandeb, to Zanzibar and Sofala; while a
second portion coasted to the northward till they reached the shores
of Beloochistan, Baroach (Barygaza), and even the western coasts of
Hindostan. Over-sea voyages from Arabia to India were doubtless of
considerably later date, when the character and use of the monsoons
had been more or less ascertained. “Every three years once came the
ships of Tarshish, bringing gold, and silver, ivory, and apes, and
peacocks;”[133] a length of time which, at first sight, seems scarcely
credible, yet is accounted for by the habits of those early mariners.
The merchants of those days had no factors as consignees of their
produce or home manufactures, with orders to have ready a cargo in
return. They were therefore obliged to keep their ships as a floating
warehouse until the exported cargo had been sold, and the produce of
the country they were to take in exchange was ready for shipment.
Indeed Herodotus states, what seems to have been a common custom, that
when their stock of corn was exhausted, the mariners landed at some
convenient spot, sowed corn, and reaped the harvest, before proceeding
with their voyage.[134]
[Sidenote: The inland commerce of Solomon.]
There is some difficulty, looking at the present desolate and barren
state of Palestine and of the districts around it, in realizing the
possibility of such vast productiveness as the story of Solomon
evidently implies; and the face of the country must have greatly
changed in the last two thousand eight hundred years, for, now at
least, the land of the Edomites, and a great portion of Arabia from
the Persian Gulf to the Euphrates on the one side, and to the Red Sea
on the other, is perfectly barren. Yet, that Babylonia was once of
extraordinary fertility we know from the statements of Herodotus, and
it is possible that much of Palestine, now withering under the bane of
Turkish despotism, might revive with better and wiser treatment.
Mr. Rich[135] states that Babylonia “is not cultivated to above half
the degree of which it is susceptible;” and General Chesney[136] says
“that those portions of Mesopotamia which are still cultivated, as
the country about Hillah, show that the region has all the fertility
ascribed to it by Herodotus.”[137]
But though the Jewish trade under Solomon had reached proportions
so unusually large, these soon fell away and dwindled almost to
nothing under his successors. With his death came wars and divisions;
Jehoshaphat lost his ships at Ezion-geber, the Edomites revolted, the
Syrians under Rezin seized the port, till at length it fell into the
more powerful grasp of Tiglath Pileser, who thus finally destroyed
the only maritime career in which the Jewish people had ever taken an
active or successful part.
[Sidenote: Babylon.]
There is reason to believe that it was not many years before the time
of David that the great cities of Mesopotamia, strictly so called,
Babylon, and Nineveh, made themselves known as commercial entrepôts,
for the storing of goods on their way from the East to the West; and
that at first, and for a considerable period, Babylon was of the two
the most important. Placed advantageously so as to make available
both the Euphrates and Tigris, Babylon secured easy communication
with the interior of Asia, and was able, therefore, to supply all
the surrounding populations with the produce of the far East. She
soon became what the prophet calls her, “a land of traffic—a city of
merchants,” partly, no doubt, because the navigation of the Persian
Gulf presented fewer difficulties and dangers than that of the Red Sea,
while her traders were largely aided by the Phœnician settlement of
Tylos among the Bahrein Islands and by Gerrha, a port on the western
shores of the Persian Gulf.[138]
In Babylon itself there were manufactories of cotton and linen, which,
with the maritime imports not required for the use of the great city,
were carried by water as far as Thapsacus and thence distributed by
caravans all over Asia.
[Sidenote: Gerrha and Tylos.]
Gerrha was a place of large trade, and its merchants and ship-owners
are probably as old as any recorded in history, for they were not
merely the factors for the precious commodities of Asia and Europe,
but, in conjunction with the Midianites and Edomites, conducted the
first caravans on record. From the remotest times they carried on
an extensive trade with the Phœnicians in spices and aromatics, and
with Babylon in mineral salt and cotton, which the island of Tylos
produced in great abundance. Indeed, the words of Herodotus in his
first chapter clearly indicate the existence of such an ancient trade
conducted by aid of the Phœnicians.
[Sidenote: Babylonian commerce.]
Though frequently interrupted by the great internal revolutions of
Asia, in which Babylon was constantly compelled to take part, and
though the trading routes between Babylon and Tyre lay through wild and
inhospitable deserts, the intercourse between them continued for many
centuries, nor ceased, so far as we know from history, till the final
overthrow of Babylon by Cyrus and the Medes and Persians.
Of the objects of this commerce a tolerably certain account has been
preserved; and among these are found corn (which has been supposed to
be indigenous in Babylonia), dogs of an extraordinary breed, carpets,
cotton and woollen fabrics, woven and embroidered with figures of
mythic animals and famous alike for their texture and workmanship and
for the richness and variety of their colours. These native products
were exchanged for spices, ivory, ebony, cinnamon and precious stones.
The _sindones_, or flowing garments, of Babylon had a great reputation
from remote times, for it was “a goodly Babylonian garment,” which
tempted Achan to his destruction (Josh. vii. v. 21); and, centuries
after Babylon had almost ceased to be counted among the nations, an
Edict of Diocletian, A.D. 284, the purpose of which was to regulate the
maximum prices of articles in the empire, speaks of several products of
Babylonian manufacture.[139]
Herodotus[140] has given a curious description of the boats seen by
him when he was at Babylon—made of willows from Armenia, sewn round
with hides, so that they must have as much resembled the Welsh coracles
still in use, as they do some of the boats on the Assyrian monuments.
[Sidenote: Assyrian boats.]
If, indeed, we may assume that there was little difference between
Assyrian and Babylonian boats, the recently disentombed monuments of
Nineveh will afford excellent evidence of their character, whether for
purposes of war or pleasure, and confirm remarkably the accuracy of the
“Father of History.” Mr. Layard remarks, that vessels (or rather rafts)
of an exactly similar construction were used by him for the conveyance
of the sculptures he discovered, from Nimrúd to Bussorah. They were
generally built of twigs and boughs, and covered with skins smeared
with bitumen, to render them water-proof. Other boats represented on
the sculptures would seem to have been constructed of planks of poplar,
fastened together by wooden pins or trenails, and in some instances
by iron nails. But, though using boats and rafts of a rude type for
the conveyance of merchandise, there is no reason to suppose that
either the Assyrians or the Babylonians had any naval tastes. Like the
Egyptians and the Jews, when they wanted vessels of large dimension
or strength, they had recourse to their Phœnician neighbours. Thus,
Phœnician shipwrights built the vessels for Sennacherib’s invasion of
Chaldæa; as they were said to have done for Semiramis.[141]
Again, Shalmaneser, when about to besiege Tyre, manned his ships with
Phœnician sailors.[142]
It is probable that the vessels on the Assyrian sculptures range in
date from Tiglath Pileser I., B.C. 1110, to nearly the fall of the
empire, B.C. 625. The earliest are those of wicker work, covered with
skins.
[Illustration: (LAYARD, II. Series, Pl. 28.)]
On other sculptures we see:—
(1.) Vessels—carrying two chariots, and apparently
constructed of planks, with a double
arrangement of oars, one set for steering,
the other for rowing (Layard, I. Series,
Pl. 15, 16).
(2.) —— conveying planks, large stones, &c.
(Layard, II. Series, Pl. 10, 12, 13, &c.).
(3.) —— carrying horses (Layard’s Nin. and
Bab. p. 232).
In one instance, where a huge carved block of stone is being moved
(one of the great bulls weighing 10 tons), the boat is evidently a
flat-bottomed barge or raft.
After the Cypriote expedition, the Assyrian boats show signs of
improvement, hence a lighter and more ornamental class of vessel; one
of the best has the prow in the form of a horse’s head.
[Illustration]
Others have a broad top to their masts, not unlike the crow’s nest,
visible in some of the medieval boats, represented on the Corporate
seals of different English port towns.
Lastly, we find vessels wherein the oarsmen are obviously placed so as
to row to the best advantage. The ships are generally _biremes_, with
perhaps thirty rowers, and are decked.
On the deck of the second of these last illustrations two figures may
be noticed with white head-dresses or veils; these are, no doubt,
the wives who are accompanying their husbands in the expedition. The
circular objects attached to the sides of the ships are probably the
shields of the warriors. The rowers are evidently placed on a lower as
well as on an upper deck.
[Illustration: (LAYARD, I. Series, Pl. 71.)]
[Illustration: (LAYARD, I. Series, Pl. 71.)]
No representations of naval engagements have as yet been met with on
the Assyrian bas-reliefs, but they may be found hereafter.
The sculptures further show, contrary to what was long the received
opinion, that the ancients possessed mechanical contrivances for
diminishing manual labour, not unlike those now made use of. Indeed,
the genius that planned and carried out the sculptures at Nineveh,
might have been deemed equal to the knowledge of the pulley, or of the
wheel and axle; and such we find to have been the case. In the museum
at Leyden there exists a well made pulley, brought from Egypt; and on
a bas-relief from Nineveh we clearly discern that the old mechanical
contrivances differed inappreciably from those of modern days. Similar
appliances would certainly have been adopted on shipboard, and ancient
vessels must have been furnished with pulleys, or such other simple
mechanical contrivances as were required for raising the anchor,
hoisting heavy sails, or otherwise assisting manual labour.
In fact, the sculptures exhibit most of the common implements in
actual use, as the saw, the pickaxe, the adze, and the handspike (or
lever of the first class). Moreover, there are still preserved in the
British Museum specimens of the metallic parts of all the above-named
instruments.
Having called attention to the more important nations, the Tyrians, the
Carthaginians, the Babylonians and the Assyrians, some other peoples
who, in the ancient history of the world, played an important part, as
maritime or naval states, require to be noticed, but more briefly.
Among these are the following: Lydia, Ionia, Caria, Phrygia, Sinope,
Cilicia, and Scythia.
[Sidenote: Lydia.]
To take first Lydia. There can be no doubt that the Persians deemed
the conquest of Lydia one of the most important of their achievements,
in the erroneous belief that the Lydians were a great naval power. The
Lydians had a navy, and may have built it themselves (though Heeren
thinks not); but their real wealth lay in the great power of their
capital, Sardes,[143] and in the fertility of the plains above and
below it. The city has well nigh perished, but the meadows, once her
joy, still retain their marvellous luxuriance. Moreover, that Lydia
was very early a state unusually rich, may be inferred from the gold
coins still occasionally found there. These, it is now believed, are
the oldest specimens of coined money, a fact affording a striking proof
of the accuracy of Herodotus,[144] who, as a Greek, would naturally
have given the first origin of coinage to Argos, or to some other Greek
state.
[Sidenote: Ionia.]
Next in order, as memorable for their sea-faring and trading abilities,
are the inhabitants of Phocæa, Ephesus, and Smyrna, who long contested
with the Phœnicians the supremacy of the Archipelago; cities too,
which, in a humbler degree, would seem to have worked out an
inter-commercial system, much resembling the Hanseatic League of later
days.
[Sidenote: Caria.]
[Sidenote: Phrygia.]
Miletus, again, as the capital of Caria, achieved no small maritime
renown, and was the parent of colonies maintaining their sway for
centuries along the inhospitable shores of the northern side of the
Black Sea. “Her extensive commerce,” says Heeren, “was not confined
to the Mediterranean, but sought to monopolize the navigation of the
Euxine and of the Sea of Azov.”[145] Again, Phrygia, one of the
earliest commercial populations of Asia Minor, was famous for its
capital, Celænæ, a great internal entrepôt, and, in a less degree, for
the possession of Sinope, itself a colony of Miletus, and a port which
until now has attracted to itself a very considerable trade with the
populations on the shores of the Black Sea.
[Sidenote: Scythians.]
The Scythians, with boundaries perfectly undefinable, but who may be
roughly described as the inhabitants of the great Steppe country, now
known as Little Russia, and of the districts north of Circassia, for
centuries played an important part in the commerce of the ancient
world. Though chiefly nomads, they were also, to a great extent,
carriers by land, while no inconsiderable section of their population
devoted itself to agriculture. Strangely, however, they cultivated, not
that they might themselves enjoy the produce, but that they might sell
it to other nations. From the same districts, embracing Odessa, and
from the ports of the Sea of Azov, vast quantities of corn are still
annually imported into England.[146]
Nor was this all: like the modern inhabitants of the eastern shores of
the Black Sea, the Scythians were also notorious for their extensive
traffic in slaves, the countries situated to the north and east of this
inland lake affording then, as now, inexhaustible magazines for this
lucrative branch of commerce: they at the same time extended thence
their trading operations far into the interior of Asia. “As far as the
Argyppæi” (the modern Calmucks), says Herodotus,[147] “the country is
well known; and also that of the other nations which we have mentioned
before. For it is often visited either by the Scythians, of whom
inquiry may easily be made, or by the Greeks of the commercial towns on
the Borysthenes [Dnieper] and Pontus. The Scythians who go into these
districts usually carry on their affairs in seven different languages,
by the assistance of the same number of interpreters.”
[Sidenote: Their caravan routes.]
The Scythian caravans probably crossed the southern end of the Ural
mountains, and passed on, round the Caspian Sea, to Great Mongolia and
the Sea of Aral. Travelling with immense herds and numerous beasts
of burden, they were able to conduct with advantage the overland
trade through Asia Minor; following, during part of their journeys, a
road which Herodotus carefully describes and to which reference will
hereafter be made.
Herodotus states that their principal trade was in furs, and that it
had been carried on from time immemorial. They also probably dealt
largely in horses,[148] and other beasts of burden, and exchanged the
manufactures of the West for such animals, and for furs and metals of
various kinds, including gold, which was apparently to be procured in
considerable quantities.
[Sidenote: To India, _via_ the Caspian.]
These routes, as well as those through Bactra (Balkh) and Maracanda
(Samarcand), the two principal marts for Indian merchandise, were all
in connection with the Caspian Sea, across which, Herodotus informs us,
there existed an organised system of navigation.[149] On this point
Heeren remarks:[150] “In the Macedonian period, the productions of
India and Bactra were carried down the Oxus to the Caspian Sea; then
over this sea to the mouths of the Araxes and Cyrus; after that by land
to the Phasis, where they were once again conveyed by water to the
different cities on the coast of the Euxine Sea.”[151]
By means such as these, the chief trade between the western shores of
the Mediterranean, the Black Sea, and the East was carried on during
the earliest periods of history. Babylon, Susa, and Nineveh, on the one
hand, with David and Solomon on the other, having been the chief causes
alike of its early success and of its vast extension.
FOOTNOTES:
[127] Gen. x. 29.
[128] Taking all things into consideration, it looks very much as
if the Saphara of Ptolemy (vi. 7, 41), described as a metropolis of
Arabia, was the original Ophir.
[129] 1 Sam. xviii.; xix. 8; xxvii. 8; 2 Chron. viii. 17, &c.
[130] 1 Chron. xxii. 8.
[131] 2 Chron. ix. 4.
[132] Stanley Lectures, xxvi. p. 182.
[133] 2 Chron. ix. 21.
[134] Herod. iv. 42. Voyage of Pharaoh Necho.
[135] Rich, “First Memoir,” p. 12.
[136] Chesney, Euphrat Exped. ii. 602-3.
[137] Cf. also Ammianus (“March of Julian,” xxiv. 3) and Zosimus
(iii.) with Layard (“Nineveh” ii. 6), and Ker Porter (ii. p. 355), for
the luxuriance of the date-bearing districts, and the general sylvan
character of many of these plains.
[138] It has been supposed that the Babylonian vessels passed along
the Persian Gulf, from Bussorah to Crokala near Kurachi, and that
they there met the vessels of Gerrha and Tylos, and proceeded onwards
along the western coast of Hindustan to Ceylon; but there seems little
probability that any ships strictly Babylonian found their way to
India. Probably between Ceylon and Babylon there was more than one
transhipment of Indian and other produce.
[139] This Edict is a great curiosity. It was first copied by Sherard
in 1709 at Eski-Hissar (Stratonicæa), and this copy is preserved in the
Harleian MSS. at the British Museum, No. 7509. Leake, “Asia Minor,” pp.
229-239. It has been recently (1866) re-edited by Mr. W. H. Waddington
with great care.
[140] Herod. i. 194. Compare, also, description of boats at Rhapta
(Arrian’s Peripl. c. 16); and the name derived from the way the boats
were made by being sewn together.
[141] See Journ. of Roy. Asiat. Soc. xix. 154.
[142] Menander ap. Joseph. Ant. Jud. ix. 14.
[143] Dion. lxxiv. Herod. i 80. Fellows’ “Asia Minor,” p. 281.
[144] Herod. i. 91.
[145] Heeren’s “Asiatic Nations,” vol. i. p. 70.
[146] The fisheries of the Black Sea were also particularly famous
in ancient times, the brackish waters of the Sea of Azov providing
excellent breeding grounds. Plin. ix. 15. Ælian. De Animal, xv. 5.
Athen. vii. p. 303. Polyb. iv. c. 5.
[147] Herod. iv. 24.
[148] Some of the names of the tribes near the Caspian, as the
Arimaspi, bear names which are compounded of the Sanscrit word for
“horse.”
[149] Herod. i. 203.
[150] Heeren’s “Asiatic Nations,” vol. ii. p. 32.
[151] There seems reason to doubt whether the Oxus ever flowed into the
Caspian Sea—it now flows into the Aral. (See Alex. Burnes’s “Journey to
Bokhara,” ii. p. 188.) On the other hand, Conolly believed he crossed
the bed of the river which did formerly flow by one branch into the
Caspian. (“Travels,” i. p. 50.) Dr. Vincent goes so far as to express
his belief that communication between the west and east, by one of the
routes specified above, was even more ancient than that by the Red Sea.
(“Commerce of the Euxine,” p. 113.)