Seasons (Hastings' Dictionary)

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 vers@. We shall see one such case below: in summer the winds favoured a quick voyage from Italy to Alexandria, but seriously hindered the re- turn 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 (including Palestine) and Rome.

There were four lines of communication: (1) by sea to or from Puteoli on the Gulf of Naples, and by land between Puteoli and Rome; (2) by sea to Corinth, and thence to Brundisium, and by land between Brun- disium and Rome; (3) by land to Ephesus, thence * In the incorrect calendar current at that time (which varied sixty-seven days from the ‘true calendar in B.c, 47) he started north from Tarsus on 5 January, and reached Tarsus on his return journey on 5 June.

But, according to the true calendar, he evidently avoided the most snowy season in Taurus. + Weil, Gesch. der Khatifen, ii. p. 159. ¢ 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, 378 ROADS AND TRAVEL (IN NT) 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 seryice at this point. ‘Che 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 Heypt 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 Romine 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 Impe- rial business, carried in Imperial ships (III. § ix.)

Egypt was kept far more closely under the imme- diate Imperial administration than any other part of the Empire, and practically the whole supply available for exportation was marked for the oman 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 population of one of his towns. iv. VOYAGE FROM ROME TO EGYPT DIRECT AND