A Predestination, and A Millennia Long Path of Global Trade and Wealth
By Prof. Muhammad Shamsaddin Megalommatis
Main Chapters
I. National History, National Identity and Colonialism
II. Orientalism and Hellenism
III. UAE Historical Heritage Threatened by Academic Colonialism
IV. Neighboring Nations & Cultures – Key Components of UAE National History
V. National History of the Emirates – Diachronic Trends
VI. Assyrian – Babylonian Literature about UAE territory: Meluhha
VII. Assyrian – Babylonian ‘Meluhha’: UAE territory, not Indus Valley
VIII. Assyrian – Babylonian Texts about Meluhha – Emirates
IX. Meluhha – Emirates, and the Late Use of ‘Meluhha’ in Assyrian Imperial Annals
X. The Aramaean Foundations of UAE History: the Rise of Gerrha (539 BCE – 642 CE)
XI. Gerrha, Achaemenid Iran, and the Interconnectedness between Africa and Asia
XII. Gerrha’s Prominence in Antiquity – Harbinger of the Present UAE Rise
XIII. Gerrha and Alexander the Great
XIV. Why Gerrha Cannot Be Located in Al Ehsa Province of Saudi Arabia
XV. Macedonian Naval Expeditions around the Peninsula, and Gerrha
XVI. Arsacid Parthian Iran, Seleucid Syria, Ptolemaic Egypt, and Gerrha
XVII. Agatharchides on Gerrha and the Sabaean (Sheba) Yemenites
XVIII. The Romans in Egypt, the Roman Naval Expedition in Yemen, and Gerrha
XIX. Strabo’s Textual References to Gerrha
XX. Gerrha and the Anonymous Author of the Text ‘Periplus of the Red Sea’
XXI. Pliny the Elder and Gerrha
XXII. Ptolemy the Geographer – his Description of Yemen, Oman, and the Emirates
XXIII. Sharjah (Sarkoe) aand Umm Quwain (Kawana) Mentioned by Ptolemy the Geographer
XXIV. The Correct Location Gerrha in UAE, and Ptolemy the Geographer
XXV. Western UAE, Qatar, Bahrain and Al Ehsa as per Ptolemy the Geographer
XXVI. UAE Islands Mentioned by Ptolemy the Geographer
XXVII. The Rise of the Sassanid Empire of Iran, and the End of Gerrha
XIII. Gerrha and Alexander the Great
When Alexander, King of Macedonia, invaded the Achaemenid empire, he preserved its entire sociopolitical structure, administrative practices, and economic activities. In fact, the ‘great’ invasions of Alexander the ‘Great’ are a modern academic fabrication well-orchestrated by the Hellenist and Orientalist forgers in order to fully support the racist theory of Western European superiority and the assorted version of History that they produced. The so-called exploits of Alexander were nothing more than the substitution of the Achaemenid dynasty by the Macedonian king; only in Pentapotamia (Punjab) and the North of India, Alexander went beyond the borders of the Achaemenid state.
Certainly, viewed from the eyes of the Ancient Greek microcosm, Alexander’s military achievement looks immense and unprecedented. But it would be an impartial modern scholar’s mistake to make his the viewpoint of so unimportant ancient testimonies. The importance of each and every Ancient Greek city did not reach the level of even a major city of Ancient Elam (such as Susa or Dur Untash, e.g. the modern site of Chogha Zanbil), the pariah of the Ancient Mesopotamian world.
Beyond the above objective observations, one has to admit that Alexander’s legacy across Greek, Oriental, and Muslim literatures and traditions left a highly positive impression, as the magnificent opus ‘Sekandernameh’ by the great Azeri epic poet highlights. However, this critical point has always been passed under silence by Hellenist and Orientalist colonial forgers who – like in so many other cases – promote a monstrous deformation of the historical sources and reality, viciously altering traits and characters.
If we carefully study Alexander’s imperial policies, during and after the completion of his military adventures, we discover an absolute continuity as regards the imperial Achaemenid Iranian tradition, in terms of royal procedure, imperial ideology, mixed marriages, administrative practices, and religious tolerance. By substituting the Iranian monarchy with his own, Alexander tremendously intensified the old Macedonian royal practices, and at the same time he rejected the pseudo-democratic, tyrannical and inhuman policies of the Greek city-states whereby slavery flourished, and ‘free’ population were only the male adults, e.g. less than 10% of each city (slaves usually totaling 80 – 90% of the inhabitants).
It was not without reason that Alexander transferred his capital from Macedonia’s marginal Pella to Babylon in Mesopotamia, at the geo-strategic center of his empire. Last echo of all these developments, and of the imperial Achaemenid Iranian continuity, which was ensured personally by the Macedonian king, can be found in the Islamic Iranian epic ‘Shahnameh’ (composed by Ferdowsi at the end of the 10th century CE) whereby Alexander (Iskander) was portrayed as an ordinary Shah of Iran. This explains also why Alexander was proclaimed Pharaoh in Egypt, following the example of Cambyses, Darius and the other Iranian rulers of Egypt.
I expanded on the issue, because Alexander’s expeditions constitute indeed an important moment for the history of the Emirates and for Gerrha’s historical role in the trade between East and West. Alexander tried to put the entire region of the Arabian peninsula (located between Mesopotamia – Syria, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, India, and Iran) under control, but despite an early success, he failed.
When Alexander was in Egypt, he sent Anaxicrates to explore the Arabian peninsula’s coastlands, starting from Egypt; in this regard, his role was similar to that of Scylax the Caryander under Darius, but his trajectory opposite. It seems that Anaxicrates reached the Red Sea straits of Bab el Mandeb, but did not proceed further on. Consequently, the coastlands of Himyar, Hadhramawt, Oman and Gerrha remained unexplored and unknown. We have every reason to believe that in the mind of the Macedonian King, who had just become a Pharaoh, the rapidly increasing East – West trade and the ensuing wealth were the target hidden behind his order.
Later on, Alexander ordered in Babylon a big harbor to be built in order to facilitate the trade with the East, which was passing through Gerrha. The harbor was planned to afford anchorage for 1000 ships of war; this means it was huge. In Arrian’s Anabasis (book vii, chapter 19: 4 and 5), we read that Alexander undertook all these preparations in order to attack Arabia. Further on, we read that the plan to invade Arabia may have been due to the fact that the people of the Arabian Peninsula were the only ‘barbarians’ (the Ancient Greek term means only ‘non-Greek’; the word itself is of Assyrian Babylonian etymology) of the wider region, who had not sent an embassy to him or done anything else to show respect to Alexander. However, the text did not specify whether this plan of Alexander concerned the Yemenite Sabaeans, Qatabanis and Hadhramis, the Aramaean Gerrhans or the Arabs of Petraia Arabia (Hedjaz) and those of the desert.
If we take into consideration another excerpt of Arrian’s Anabasis, we may conclude that Alexander’s plan rather concerned the inhabitants of Felix Arabia, i.e. the Sabaeans, the Qatabanis, the Hadhramis, the Omanis and the Gerrhans; the text reads: ‘’the land fertility induced Alexander to attempt to invade the land’’ (book vii, chapter 20: 2). In the same text, we find an enumeration of the basic merchandises that, produced in Arabia Felix and transported via Gerrha, made the Sabaeans and the Gerrhans prosperous and wealthy: cassia, myrrh, frankincense and cinnamon!
It seems that, despite his advance in Iran, Central Asia, and India, Alexander never forgot his back thoughts and the secret desire to annex the Arabian Peninsula. According to the historical records, Alexander ordered three more times a naval expedition to be sent around the Arabian Peninsula; this demonstrates an extraordinary persistence! However, all three expeditions failed.
XIV. Why Gerrha Cannot Be Located in Al Ehsa Province of Saudi Arabia
The first expedition involved the dispatch of a triaconter (a vessel with 30 oars) under Archias, who was ordered to investigate the course of the voyage alongside the coast of the Arabian peninsula; however, they sailed up to the island of Tylos (which is the Ancient Assyrian / Babylonian Tilmun, i.e. today’s Bahrain) and did not dare to venture beyond that point (book vii, chapter 20:6 and 7).
This event offers a very strong argument against the erroneous effort to identify Gerrha with a possible location in the Saudi coastland between Qatar and Kuwait, which was supported amongst others by David W. Tschanz (www.aramcoexpats.com/articles/2002/08/lost-city-of-gerrha-still-attracts-searchers). In fact, if Gerrha had been located there, Archias would have mentioned the city while undertaking his voyage alongside the northeastern coast of the peninsula.
At this point, I have to deplore all earlier efforts that were at times attempted by great scholars like Jean Baptiste Bourguignon d’Anville who identified Gerrha with Qatif, Carsten Niebuhr who preferred Kuwait and C. Forsterwho suggested that the ruins at the head of the bay behind the islands of Bahrain were the ruins of Gerrha. It is quite obvious that the aforementioned scholars never studied the Ancient Greek and Latin texts that relate to Gerrha.
Even more absurd is the recent effort of Abdulkhaliq Al Janbi (in his book ‘Gerrha, The Ancient City Of International Trade’ – in Arabic) to identify Gerrha with the old city of Hajar or the remains of Al-‘Uqair in Al Ehsa province of Saudi Arabia; deprived of any reference to key textual information (see below), this book seems to be part of a Saudi expansionist agenda mixed again with historical falsification.
In fact, beyond the existing ancient sources, there is a far more convincing argument that explains the reason for which Gerrha could not be located in the Saudi Arabian coastland between Qatar and Bahrain. To understand this point, it takes a good study of the vast commercial network that was progressively setup between East and West during the Late Antiquity; great attention should be first paid at the nature, the traits and the functionality of this triple network that offered possible alternatives among land, desert and sea routes.
Gerrha came to existence because Aramaeans (Chaldaeans) moved to its location and built up the city as per their own needs as merchants; this was quite typical of the Aramaeans. They used to setup new cities in diverse countries; as example, they founded Kaine (‘’new’’) city in Upper Egypt at a strategic location on the road that linked the Nile Valley with the Red Sea coast. Kaine survived down to our times as Qena, 60 km north of Luxor.
As the Aramaeans undertook and totally controlled the trade with Yemenites across the peninsula and other parts of the Asiatic landmass, they were the primary partners of the Sabaeans, the strongest Yemenite kingdom in land. In coordination with the Sabaeans, and in full understanding of their mutual, commercial – economic needs, the Aramaeans founded Gerrha. In fact, the city location should serve the needs of the Sabaean – Aramaean trade and the diffusion of East African and Yemenite merchandises to Mesopotamia, Iran, Caucasus, and Central Asia.
More specifically, the location of Gerrha would serve the Sabaean – Aramaean interests by being at the end of a road and at the beginning of a bifurcation. This means that products for Mesopotamia, Anatolia, Syria, Armenia, and Caucasus would be dispatched toward the West; on the other hand, merchandises for Central Asia and India would be shipped toward the North and the East. Starting from the land of the Sabaeans and advancing to the North, one immediately understands that the bifurcation point (Gerrha) could not be located in any other land except the territory of the Emirates.
If Gerrha was located in the area of today’s Al Ehsa province of Saudi Arabia, its location would not serve the Sabaean – Aramaean interests, as it would expose the East African and Yemenite merchandises that were directed for Central Asia to Arsacid Parthian taxes and customs.
Worse, if Gerrha was located in the area of today’s Al Ehsa province of Saudi Arabia, there would not be any need for a city to be built there at all! Why building a city so close to the southern part of Mesopotamia (today’s Iraq and Kuwait), since the road from North Yemen would soon reach the confines of Mesopotamia? Caravans transporting goods from Yemen would not need to stop in any city if they had already reached the territory of Al Ehsa province of today’s Saudi Arabia; they would simply advance and soon reach their destination.
So, to first search for a possible location of an ancient city located on the trade network between East and West like Gerrha, one must understand that it should be pretty far from Mesopotamia in order to have a reason to exist.
XV. Macedonian Naval Expeditions around the Peninsula, and Gerrha
Another naval expedition was undertaken by Androsthenes, who sailed around a part of the Arabian Peninsula, and wrote a book narrating his explorations. The book is now lost, but it was studied during the Late Antiquity by various historians and geographers. For instance, Strabo, who wrote 300 years later, quoted Androsthenes’ book (Strabo, book 16, 3:1).
Alexander demanded one more naval expedition to be undertaken, and this was carried out by Hieron of Soli; Arrian (Anabasis, book vii, chapter 20: 7, 8) narrates that the instructions were to sail as far as the Arabian Gulf (this means today’s Red Sea) up to Egypt, and that Hieron advanced more than all previous explorers, but still failed to complete the exploration.
The aforementioned developments, which occurred in the period 330 – 323 BCE (two centuries and two decades after the inception of the Achaemenid state and the first circumnavigation of the Arabian Peninsula which was successfully undertaken by Scylax of Caryander), boded only well for Gerrha, as the Aramaean caravan city – state in the southern coastlands of today’s Emirates remained out of the borders of the Macedonian Emperor’s state, as many other adjacent regions did, namely the Arabian Peninsula’s northern parts, Oman, the various Yemenite states, Azania (Somalia). Out of the Macedonian control was also Kush (Ethiopia, in today’s Northern Sudan), and the same occurred to the tiny Abyssinian state around Adulis (near today’s Massawa, in Eritrea) and Axum as well.
An important moment of the National History of the Emirates proved to be February 324 BCE. It was then that Alexander’s fleet was ordered to sail under Admiral Nearchos from Indus estuary back to Mesopotamia, while the army would cross Gedrosia (today’s Baluchistan), Carmania (today’s Iranian province of Kerman), and Persia (Fars) to Babylon, Alexander’s new and imperial capital.
The first part of the itinerary would of course be fluvial, because this fleet had not sailed to India while Alexander advanced in Iran, but was built in Hydaspes river (today’s Jhelum river) to address Alexander’s needs for war with the Northern Indian states. During the trip, Nearchus had to remain behind and oversee repairs that had to be made during the journey. Sailing off the coastlands of Gedrosia (Baluchistan) proved to be an extremely harsh attempt to the extent that they became unrecognizable! As a matter of fact, when Nearchus’ fleet reached the coast of Iran beyond the straits, whereby he came to know that Alexander and the Macedonian army in their return movement were in nearby Carmania, he set out along with Archias to meet the Macedonian king. However, Alexander and his chief-of-staff had at first some difficulty to recognize them. Following the brief encounter and the subsequent discussions and religious tasks (sacrifices), Nearchus and Archias returned to the fleet and sailed to the estuary of Tigris and Euphrates, and further on to Susa (in today’s Iran) to encounter Alexander again. While crossing the Persian Gulf, he managed to explore parts of the Arabian coastland, and he wrote down a special report. Almost five centuries later, the Roman historian Arrian in his Indica (XLIII) used info gathered by Nearchus’ sailors, while writing the following:
‘’On the right side of the Red Sea beyond Babylonia is the chief part of Arabia, and of this a part comes down to the sea of Phoenicia and Palestinian Syria, but on the west, up to the Mediterranean, the Egyptians are upon the Arabian borders. Along Egypt a gulf running in from the Great Sea makes it clear that by reason of the gulf’s joining with the High Seas one might sail round from Babylon into this gulf which runs into Egypt. Yet, in point of fact, no one has yet sailed round this way by reason of the heat and the desert nature of the coasts, only a few people who sailed over the open sea. But those of the army of Cambyses who came safe from Egypt to Susa and those troops who were sent from Ptolemy Lagus to Seleucus Nicator at Babylon through Arabia crossed an isthmus in a period of eight days and passed through a waterless and desert country, riding fast upon camels, carrying water for themselves on their camels, and travelling by night; for during the day they could not come out of shelter by reason of the heat’’.
‘’Yet from the Arabian gulf which runs along Egypt people have started, and have circumnavigated the greater part of Arabia hoping to reach the sea nearest to Susa and Persia, and thus have sailed so far round the Arabian coast as the amount of fresh water taken aboard their vessels have permitted, and then have returned home again. And those whom Alexander sent from Babylon, in order that, sailing as far as they could on the right of the Red Sea, they might reconnoitre the country on this side, these explorers sighted certain islands lying on their course, and very possibly put in at the mainland of Arabia. But the cape which Nearchus says his party sighted running out into the sea opposite Carmania no one has ever been able to round, and thus turn inwards towards the far side’’.
From the above excerpts, we understand that, although Nearchus is believed to have set foot on Tylos island (Bahrain), he did not disembark on any point of the territory of today’s Emirates and Gerrha or on Mount Mussandam on the Arabian Peninsula’s promontory in the straits. Finally, that territory remained out of reach for Alexander’s army and fleet, despite the fact that their great wealth was known.
Despite all his efforts, Alexander’s state could not survive his founder; it was divided among his successors, and even they had difficulties to control their vast territories. The largest of all four states of Alexander’s successors was the Syrian state of the Seleucids, with Antioch (today’s Antakya in Hatay, Turkey) as capital. It controlled today’s Eastern Turkey, Syria, Mesopotamia, the Iranian plateau, the Central Asiatic provinces, and the entire territory of today’s Afghanistan and Pakistan, which were then known as Bactria, Arachosia, Gedrosia and Pentapotamia. The louse control of the eastern provinces had an early consequence; 60 years after Alexander’s death, the Iranian plateau, the Central Asiatic and the Eastern provinces were lost to the Seleucid Empire of Syria that was limited in only the lands of Eastern Anatolia, Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine.
XVI. Arsacid Parthian Iran, Seleucid Syria, Ptolemaic Egypt, and Gerrha
In Parthia (northeastern provinces of today’s Iran) rose a dynasty that expelled the Macedonians, declared Iran’s independence, and controlled most but not all the territories lost to the Seleucids of Antioch. Subsequently, the few Macedonian garrisons left in Bactria, separated from Antioch, seceded from Iran, and ruled the largest part of today’s Afghanistan (then known as Bactria). Except Bactria (under Macedonian administration), several minor states emerged in the areas of Gedrosia, Arachosia and Pentapotamia, east of the Parthian Iranian state.
The above developments boded also well for Gerrha and its importance in the trade routes between the Mediterranean, East Africa, Central Asia and China. Surrounded by many local states with little control over regional affairs, Gerrha played politics to promote its economic status. To Gerrha’s greatest benefit, this situation lasted long. The Parthian dynasty of Iran, known as Ashkanian (Arsacids), proved to be the longest in three millennia of Iranian History; it lasted ca. 475 years (250 BCE – 224 CE), until the rise of the nationalistic Persian dynasty of Sassanian (Sassanids). This period highlights Gerrha rise to economic prominence.
Other developments took place soon to help further increase Gerrha’s importance. The rise of the Arsacids in Iran gave birth to a certain rivalry with the Seleucids of Antioch (the event involved marginal powers as well, from Pontus and Armenia to North India). In addition, the weakened Seleucid Empire entered into a bitter rivalry with the Ptolemies who ruled Egypt and inherited from Alexander’s empire the islands of Cyprus and Crete, a development that could asphyxiate the Seleucids. Seleucid Syria was definitely stronger, but did not prevail easily. Parthian Iran and the Roman Republic benefitted from the Syro-Egyptian effort of mutual destruction.
Because of the constant wars between Ptolemaic Egypt and Seleucid Syria, the eastern provinces of the Seleucid state (that were located west of the Parthian Empire of Iran) gradually managed to achieve a certain degree of autonomy; many small Aramaean states were then formed, notably Tadmor (Palmyra in today’s East Syria), Rekem / Petra of the Nabataeans (in today’s South Jordan), Hatra (in today’s NW Iraq), and Characene (in today’s South Iraq and Kuwait). Their typical localism was beneficial to the role Gerrha used and aspired to play.
During the 3rd century BCE various ambassadors of either the Seleucids or the Ptolemies moved to India to encounter kings like Chandragupta Maurya, Bindusara and Ashoka. Megasthenes was sent by Seleucos I of Syria, but he certainly moved from Iran, crossing Bactria and Pentapotamia, to reach Pataliputra. Deimachus met Bindusara and wrote down the most trustworthy description of India; his account is by now lost, but was greatly appreciated by Late Antiquity authors, such as Strabo.
Dionysius was sent to Ashoka by Ptolemy II Philadelphus of Egypt; Pliny the Elder saved the detail, but for his case, it is more probable that he crossed the Arabian Peninsula and the Gulf up to Gerrha, before sailing further to the area of Indus estuary, in order to avoid the Seleucid garrisons that protected the territory of Egypt’s great rival in Palestine and Southern Mesopotamia.
The lure of wealth generated in Gerrha by the Aramaean traders and inhabitants was too attractive for Antiochus III the Great (222 – 187 BCE) to avoid. In 205 BC, he decided to launch a large-scale military incursion against the Gerrhans in order to secure for his country a reasonable portion of their trade. He probably advanced beyond Mesopotamia, across the northwestern coastland of the Arabian Peninsula, but was finally diverted from his goal of capturing the city, because the Gerrhans offered to pay a great tribute involving 500 talents of silver, 1000 talents of frankincense, and 200 talents of ‘stacte’ myrrh.
Anxious to balance the only potential threat, the Arsacid Empire of Iran, Gerrha continued paying tribute to Seleucid Empire even in later periods. And to balance Seleucid Syria, the Gerrhans had good relations with Ptolemaic Egypt as well.
At those days, another exploration was undertaken by Ariston, supported by the Ptolemaic rulers of Egypt; the expedition started from Egypt and marked a success in exploring the northwestern coastlands of the Arabian Peninsula (Agatharchides, fragm. 103, GGM I, p.190 -191). However, it is highly unlikely that he reached the Bab el Mandeb straits of the Red Sea, let alone any region beyond.
During the same period (3rd century BCE), the greater scholarly attempt to write down accurate information and setup full maps of the entire region between Egypt, Mesopotamia and India ws undertaken by Eratosthenes of Cyrene (today’s Benghazi in Libya) , the famous librarian of the Library of Alexandria. His map of the Arabian Peninsula and the details included for the area of the Emirates and Oman demonstrate an advanced level of knowledge about the region. Science could only increase thanks to the accelerated study of earlier Egyptian and Babylonian scientific texts, which was undertaken by people like Hipparchus (190 – 120 BCE).
XVII. Agatharchides on Gerrha and the Sabaean (Sheba) Yemenites
It was at the middle of the 2nd century BCE that Agatharchides wrote an acclamation about Gerrha in his treatise ‘On the Red Sea’ (here it is to be reminded that the term ‘Red Sea’ in Greek at those days denoted the entire Indian Ocean, the Gulf, and today’s Red Sea, which was then called ‘Arabian Gulf’):
‘’It seems that there is no wealthier nation than the Sabaeans and the Gerrhans; the latter are used to cash all the taxes and customs involved in the trade between Asia and Europe. They helped Ptolemies’ acquisitions in Syria increase in wealth very much, and thanks to Phoenician labor, they built up profitable trade companies, and much more’’ (Agatharchides, fr. 102, GGM, I, p. 189 – 190).
Egyptians tried to improve their relations with the Lihyan Arabs of North Hedjaz whose tribal leaders imitated the Egyptian royal practices, by making of the name of the Ptolemies an early Arabic synonym for ‘king’; their title ‘Tulmai’ or ‘Talmai’ was saved indeed in Greek inscriptions. Trying to take greater benefit from the Red Sea trade, Egyptians and Alexandrian Greeks set up colonies alongside the Red Sea coast, like Ptolemais Theron (today’s Suakin) in the Sudanese (Meroitic Ethiopian) coastland. A certain rivalry between Alexandria and Gerrha started becoming more evident.
By the time Artemidorus Ephesius undertook his exploration (around 100 BCE), a great change had occurred in Yemen, and this contributed to further increase in Gerrha’s wealth. The combined forces of Sheba and Himyar invaded the strongest maritime force among the Yemenite states, Qataban, in an effort to take greater benefit of the enormous wealth accumulated at Timna, the capital of the Yemenite thalassocracy (modern Beihan in Shabwah governorate). The major outcome of this event was the Sabaean – Himyarite combined control over the former Qatabani colonies in parts of Somalia and East African coastlands, then called Azania, down to ca. today’s Darussalam in Tanzania. This development greatly affected Gerrha because of the excellent relationship between the Gulf city-state and the Sabaeans. East African products transported through Gerrha to parts of Asia and Europe certainly had lower taxation after Qataban disappeared from the scene.
However, the same event triggered also another development that was quite opposite to the Sabaean – Gerrhan interests; the Sabaean – Himyarite alliance was less experienced across the seas, and the collapse of Qataban, the stronger naval force among the Yemenite states, allowed Ptolemaic Egypt to further expand in the Red Sea and the Bab el Mandeb straits. This signified lower taxes and customs, greater control over the Horn of Africa trade, and an Alexandrian antagonism with Gerrha for the diffusion of East African, Yemenite, Omani and Indian merchandises in the Mediterranean.
(to be continued)
Megalommatis's Blog 