a view of making it
the route of the Indian trade; but this was by no means the case. Even
Robertson, in his historical disquisition concerning ancient India,
falls into this error, to which he adds the greater mistake of
declaring, "that the work was never finished."[1] On the other hand, he
points out with accuracy the real direction which Ptolemy gave to the
trade with India, by Berenice and Coptos, and the great works he
constructed for the convenience of transporting goods from the Nile
across the desert to the Red Sea; and it may be remarked, that the
Indian trade always kept this route, or one similar, until the
discovery of that by the Cape of Good Hope--the great route of the
merchants being either by Coptos and Berenice, or by Coptos and Myos
Hormos, or, at a later period, by the Vicus Apollinis to Philotera.
Ptolemy was perfectly aware of all the difficulties of the navigation
of the northern part of the Red Sea, during the summer months, against
the north wind. The great object of the canal was, the export of
produce from the Delta, for which there was a great demand in the
countries on the northern shores of the Red Sea. But there can be no
doubt that ships would often sail from Arsinoee to India, disposing of
their Egyptian cargo on the way, and returning with their Indian goods
to Berenice, and sometimes to Arsinoee. Lucian, indeed, mentions, that
"a young man, having sailed up the Nile to Clysina, and finding a ship
ready to depart for India, was induced to embark."[2]

[1] P. 46, and note xvii.

[2] Alexander, 44.

The fact that the ancients found the navigation of the Nile more
commodious and cheaper than that of the Red Sea, even though it entailed
on them the burden of transporting their merchandise from Coptos by
caravan, for six or seven days, to Berenice or Myos Hormos, should not
be lost sight of in examining the objects for which the ancient canal to
Arsinoee was constructed. The immense extent of the Indian trade, by
Berenice and Myos Hormos, is attested by many passages in the Greek and
Roman classics.[1]

[1] Compare Strabo, xii. c. 5, vol. i. p. 187, ed. Tauch.; xviii. i.
vol. iii. p. 461. Plinii Hist. Nat. vi. 23; xii. 18. Arriani Perip.
maris Erythr. in Hudson's Geog. min. Tom. i. 32. Athenaeus, v. p. 201.

The opinion which prevails very generally concerning the great
inferiority of the ancients in naval skill, requires also to be confined
strictly to nautical knowledge, and should