Chennai’s ancient trade link with Rome unearthed:

For ancient Romans, Chennai was not just another trading port town along the coastline. Instead, the city was a key transit hub for them to carry out their trade.

New findings have emerged after a team of archaeologists from the Tamil Nadu State Archaeology Department found broken pieces of roulette ware, a Roman royal household ware, at an excavation site in Pattarai Perambadur, a small village with around 600 farming families on the western outskirts of Chennai.

“Presence of roulette ware far away from the coastline is interesting because it indicates Romans traded beyond coastal towns,” R. Sivanantham, deputy director, Tamil Nadu State Archaeology Department, told The Hindu.

Funded by the State government , the three-month-long excavation, which ended last Tuesday, was monitored by the Commissioner of the Department, D. Karthikeyan. The team comprised J. Baskar, archaeological officer (Chennai); J. Ranjith, Arcot curator; and P. Baskar, epigraphist, Poompuhar.

Archaeologists said this was the first time evidence has emerged on Roman presence in western parts of the city, indicating they travelled away from the coastline. The three ancient sites – Nathamedu, Aanaimedu and Irularthoppu – in Pattarai Perambadur village were excavated with 12 trenches.

The team found most of the 200 antiques, including stone tools, pot shreds, beads made of ivory, glass and terracotta, conical jars and a ring well from Irularthoppu hamlet in three small trenches.

They found an entire sequence of habitations since the early Palaeolithic age (10,000 years ago) to early Christian era.
Read more at archaeologynewsnetwork.blogspot.com...

I think there is much much more to ancient trading routes and contacts than we are lead to believe, for one there is always that individual who want to go further to make that coin away from the competition remember that other thread on www.abovetopsecret.com..., I had seen a doc before that centered on Romes international trade relations, if I remember the title will post but it involved India, and yes Indians went to Rome as well, it's just fascinating to see how interconnected we all are, btw slightly O.T but I am viewing the new Marco Polo series and they had the Papal army marching on Mongolia, off course it's nonsense but, I have always wondered what would happen if imperial Rome and Imperial China clashed, we know that the later Mongols mopped the floor with the Papal or European armies, but still Mongol tactics are not Chinese.. how would they match up against imperial Rome is a fantasy flick waiting to be made.

a reply to: Spider879

Interesting.....Yes, I agree that ancient man was more connected and way more technically "apt" than we in the current day are led to believe. The difference to our curent time(s), I think, is that the technology at that time was more natural whereas current technology is more artificial.

the issue is, science doesn't observe what isn't proven. so "led to believe" is really more "share real information and not speculation". although you are right...it seems pretty obvious that the Romans traded with anyone who was within reach of their ships.

originally posted by: lostbook
a reply to: Spider879

Interesting.....Yes, I agree that ancient man was more connected and way more technically "apt" than we in the current day are led to believe. The difference to our curent time(s), I think, is that the technology at that time was more natural whereas current technology is more artificial.

The Silk Road between Europe and China was there for thousands of years. Some people lived there entire lives on camel caravans just going back and forth between market towns. Roman emperors actually tried banning the purchase of merchandise with gold coins because it was affecting the Roman economy.

a reply to: Spider879

An interesting article, but absolutely not the spectacular news you’re making it out to be. Not news at all, in fact. We know from Pliny and others that there was trade between India and the Roman Empire. Roman coins were in common use in Sri Lanka, for example, from as early as the third century AD. This has been known since at least the early twentieth century.

However, the coins need not have been carried there by Romans. More likely, they were used by Persians and others engaged in trade.

Roman Coins (3rd Century to mid 7th Century)

Roman coins and contemporary local imitations of Roman coins were in wide circulation in Lanka for a period of at least four centuries, starting in the third century CE. Lanka was situated on the maritime trade routes between Rome and China and traded many commodities such as jewels, pearls, camphorwood, spices and ebony with the Romans over this long period. The Roman historian Pliny the Elder recorded that four ambassadors of Taprobane were sent to Rome during the reign of King Chandhrakuma Siva (44-52CE) and it is probable that some Lankan trade commenced at that time. Large hoards of copper or bronze Roman coins and contemporary Indo-roman imitations have been found at many places in Lanka with a large hoard being found in 1987 at Sigiriya. The coins are always very worn indicating a wide and constant circulation and the roman coins are usually third century and later in age. These hoards suggest that the roman and indo-roman coinage was probably used as small change long after the minting date of the coins themselves. A group of these coins is shown in the photo. Source and coin photos

People who wonder whether ‘there is more to history than we know’ are right to wonder; there is certainly more to it than they know. But to assume universal ignorance is arrogant and stupid. It does scholars and historians a great disservice. Of course there is more to it than we know — nobody can give a certain and comprehensive account of something that happened even five minutes ago — but there is a huge amount we do know. The trouble is that if you really want to make at least reasonably truthful and coherent statements about the past you have to do a lot of studying first and even then you have to be very cautious. So you put in years of study and publish papers full of tiny details that only your colleagues will read. That is why things of this kind are not more widely known — they appear in scholarly publications but are not popular with the media because, frankly, very few people are really interested.

It always amuses me to see these historical ‘revelations’ that one has known for years being trotted out on ATS as if they are undiscovered marvels or secret conspiracies come to light. What is not so amusing is when people make up their own fallacious historical narratives based on the half-digested fragments of knowledge they have consumed. They take their speculations much too far, usually in the service of some personal worldview they wish to propagate. It is, in fact, ignorance and falsehood that they are propagating.

I need say no more, I think.

I for one was completely ignorant of Roman trade in India, and even though this might not be news to everyone I find it fascinating, so thanks for the thread

a reply to: athousandlives

I’m glad the OP was able to enlighten you on Roman trade with India. But surely there are better places to learn about history than ATS, where most of the information produced is fallacious or misinterpreted?