iii. VARIATIONS IN THE ROUTES AT DIFFERENT SEASONS.— Where a long sea passage was involved, it does not follow that the route from the province to Rome was the same as the return from Rome to the province. The winds which favoured the voyage from Rome might prohibit the return voyage, or vice versa. We shall see one such case below: in summer the winds favoured a quick voyage from Italy to Alexandria, but peecaely hindered the return voyage. In general, the path from Rome to the East followed a different line from the path which led from the East to Rome ; and an envoy from the East would go to Rome by one path and return by another.
Both these causes contributed to complicate the communications between the province of Syria (ineluding Palestine) and Rome. ‘There were four lines of communication: (1) by sea to or froin Puteoli on the Gulf of Naples, and by land be- tween Puteoli and Rome; (2) by sea to Corinth, and thence to Brundisium, and by land between Brundisium and Rome; (8) by land to Ephesus,
* In the incorrect calendar current at that time (which varied sixty-seven days from the true calendar in B.¢. 47) he started north from Tarsus on 5 January, and reached Tarsus on his re- turn journey on 5 June. But, according to the true calendar, he evidently avoided the most snowy season in Taurus.
+ Weil, Gesch. der Khalifen, ii. p. 159.
t The other road, by Germanicia, which the Arabs often em- ployed, seems never to have been used by Harun, and would
be more unsuitable for a winter expedition.
er SS
pe eee
378 ROADS AND TRAVEL (IN NT)
ROADS AND TRAVEL (IN NT)
thence by sea to Corinth, ete., as in the preceding route ; (4) the land route across Asia Minor, and, after crossing to Europe, along the Egnatian Way to Dyrrachium, and thence across the Adriatic Sea to Brundisium.
The first-named was the great route, preferred by trade and by travellers who desired to make a rapid journey eastward from Italy. It was closely connected with the Egyptian communication with Rome ; and in fact it was the splendid and regular service of ships between Alexandria and Puteoli that made this route so important and so rapid. We shall therefore describe the Alexandrian service at this point. The Syrian service connected itself with the Alexandrian as it best could, and used the latter as much as possible. The excellence of the Alexandrian service was due to the fact that Egypt was the mainstay of the Imperial corn supply for feeding the gigantic city of Rome. When one considers the vast population of Rome (probably not very much under a million), the smallness of the Italian harvest (for Italy was naturally far more productive of wine, oil, and fruits than of grain; and Italian wheat could no longer be grown at a profit in competition with sea-borne grain), and the fact that scarcity in Rome meant discontent, mutiny, and probably revolution after the murder of the Emperor who had let the corn supply fail, it becomes obvious that the maintenance of a steady and trustworthy service between Rome and the principal corn- producing countries was an Imperial concern of the very first importance. With the defective means of commerce and transport then available, private enterprise was quite incapable of feeding the great population of Rome; the corn supply was a most important department of the Imperial administration ; and, in particular, the long trans- port from Egypt was mainly performed by a fleet in the Imperial service. Transport from the other chief producing countries—Sicily, Sardinia, and Africa—was easier, and private enterprise had probably greater scope there; but the Egyptian corn was the greatest source of supply for Rome.
Of course it is not to be supposed that there was no private trade between Puteoli and Egypt; on the contrary, there was doubtless a good deal. But the corn trade seems to have been an Imperial business, carried in Imperial ships (IIL. §ix.). Egypt was kept far more closely under the immediate Imperial administration fees any other part of the Empire, and practically the whole supply available for exportation was marked for the Roman service and managed by the Emperor’s own private representatives. No great Roman nobles were allowed even to set foot in Egypt, except on rare occasions by special permission. The land of Egypt was managed as a sort of great private appanage of the reigning Emperor. In a few cases we read of corn from Alexandria being brought to other cities of the Empire; but this was in case of famine, and must have required the special grace of the Emperor, to relieve the distressed popula- tion of one of his towns.
iv. VOYAGE FROM ROME TO EGYPT DIRECT AND THENCE TO PALESTINE. —Communication from Puteoli to Alexandria was maintained direct across sea. The prevalent summer wind in the east Mediterranean waters was westerly ; and the ships ran in a direct course from the south of Italy to the Egyptian coast, keeping at the outset well out south from the Italian coast, in order to avoid the land winds and to get into the steady Medi- terranean currents of air.
The pilots or sailing-masters had acquired great skill in these long voyages, and could make their harbour with almost unerring accuracy: they are compared by Philo to skilful charioteers driving