3 ms·

We generally have a lot of misconceptions about how extensive trade was in the ancient world. As time goes on we learn it started earlier than we thought and wa

by jmyeet 3y ago

We generally have a lot of misconceptions about how extensive trade was in the ancient world. As time goes on we learn it started earlier than we thought and was way more extensive. Consider the Uluburun wreck [1]. This dates from over 3000 years ago and nearly 1000 years earlier than the rise of the Roman Republic. Goods on this ship come from like 7 different places. One of them, lapis lazuli, had one (known) source in the ancient world: what is now modern day Afghanistan. We in the West often have this view that Rome was really the start of civilization in many ways. You specifically mention the borders of Rome as a factor. Large empires had risen, lasted centuries and fallen long before Rome existed. The founding of Rome is closer to our time than to the kingdoms and empires of the Tigris-Euphrates region (eg Sumeria, Mesopotamia). The Hittites of Anatolia had extensive writing, libraries and trade. Thanks to the fires in Hattusa firing the clay tablets, we have personal correspondence between the king and the Egyptian pharoah (Ramses II IIRC). Going even further back and we have evidence of trade 10,000 years earlier (eg obsidian from Turkey popped up all over the place and wheat products were traded in Britain 2,000 years before they farmed it [2]). Fast forward to the Roman era, and the Republic then Empire and ancient China were known to each other [3] although there's no evidence of direct contact or trade. [1]: https://www.worldhistory.org/Uluburun_Shipwreck/ https://www.worldhistory.org/Uluburun_Shipwreck/ [2]: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/02/27/388822209/stone-age-britons-were-eating-wheat-2-000-years-before-they-farmed-it https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2015/02/27/388822209/st... [3]: https://www.thecollector.com/rome-and-china/ https://www.thecollector.com/rome-and-china/

golergka 3y ago
> We in the West often have this view that Rome was really the start of civilization in many ways. I find this opinion surprising. Do you think people genuinely not know about Bronze age civilisations? Do they not know about pyramids, which were just as ancient to Caesar as he is to us?
ggm 3y ago
I used Rome as a focal point. Most Archeology european english speaking people will encounter outside of the long barrows and dolmen of Western Europe is immediate pre-Roman, Roman, or post Roman. Sure, we have long barrows and other pre-roman "stuff" but the vast bulk of excavations now in the UK (for instance) tends to be roman or post-roman, along the route of the HS2 and similar city bound brownfield site development. I would be surprised if the digs in mainstream Europe routinely turn up a lot of earlier culture: I would expect the opportunistic emergency archeology associated with building and civil engineering is the predominant source of finds, and they tend to be .. well .. roman or post roman. But your point is well made. History of trade didn't start with Roman conquests or failures, and people sailed the Black sea long long before the Romans got there. Sure: Euro-centric, western culture centric PoV. I wrote from personal interest. I am sure there is a a shitload of great non-roman Archeology going on outside of the places I know. I bet Neanderthal and Denosivan's traded. It's natural for humans to swap what they have for what they want.

by jmyeet 3y ago

golergka 3y ago

> We in the West often have this view that Rome was really the start of civilization in many ways. I find this opinion surprising. Do you think people genuinely not know about Bronze age civilisations? Do they not know about pyramids, which were just as ancient to Caesar as he is to us?

ggm 3y ago

I used Rome as a focal point. Most Archeology european english speaking people will encounter outside of the long barrows and dolmen of Western Europe is immediate pre-Roman, Roman, or post Roman. Sure, we have long barrows and other pre-roman "stuff" but the vast bulk of excavations now in the UK (for instance) tends to be roman or post-roman, along the route of the HS2 and similar city bound brownfield site development. I would be surprised if the digs in mainstream Europe routinely turn up a lot of earlier culture: I would expect the opportunistic emergency archeology associated with building and civil engineering is the predominant source of finds, and they tend to be .. well .. roman or post roman. But your point is well made. History of trade didn't start with Roman conquests or failures, and people sailed the Black sea long long before the Romans got there. Sure: Euro-centric, western culture centric PoV. I wrote from personal interest. I am sure there is a a shitload of great non-roman Archeology going on outside of the places I know. I bet Neanderthal and Denosivan's traded. It's natural for humans to swap what they have for what they want.