[Sca-cooks] spice trade transit time

[Decker, Terry D.]

> Is da Gama's voyage really a good example? Since it was
> mainly political in
> nature, I would assume that  he would have been delayed many
> times to take
> care of necessary visits to local dignitaries, etc.

Da Gama's voyage serves as a readily accessible baseline.  The trip to
Calcutta took just over 11 months and we know that da Gama was engaged in
gunboat diplomacy along the African coast during this period.  He spent 4
1/2 months along the Indian coast and just over 9 months on the return
voyage.  The return voyage is probably more indicative of the actual sailing
time to Europe, although, IIRC he made a few flag stops in Africa to
reinforce his treaties on the return.

We are
> also assuming
> that the spice trade was controled by Europe early on which
> is definitely not
> the case. Arab merchants traded through Venice for the
> majority of the middle
> ages. It was not until the end of SCA time that the Europeans
> took any direct
> hand in direct spice trading.

There is a distinct difference between the "spice trade" and "direct trading
in spices."  The first covers all aspects of the trade, the second access to
the original sources.  From about the 4th Century to the beginning of the
16th Century, the Arabs controlled the sources of the spices and the trade
into the Mediterranean.  The trade into Europe proper was controlled first
by Byzantium and then by Venice.  I believe you will find Venice supported
the sack of Constantinople in 1202, weakening the Byzantines sufficiently
for Venice to take over the spice trade.

The Arabs controlled the sources of the spices and traded with the
Venetians, who became the distributors of spices in Europe.  The Arab
merchants in Egypt and the European merchants in Venice served as the
"middlemen" of the spice trade.  If you follow the money, Europeans,
especially Venetians, were very much involved in and controlled the European
end of the spice trade.

Da Gama's second voyage broke the Egypt/Venice spice monopoly.  Venice was
so heavily tied into the spice trade, that the loss of revenue directly
contributed to the loss of Venice's overseas possessions and its eventual
subjugation by Austria in the 18th Century.

>
> A trip around Africa was not necessary for the Arab traders.
> I would theorize
> that throughout most of the SCA time period spices were
> considerably fresher
> and that it was not until the rise of the Portuguese trade in the 16th
> century CE that we find spices that were of questionable
> freshness. Most
> certainly, IMO, available Arabian spices were much more
> potent for the 800+
> years before Portugal rounded the African continent.
>
> Ras

So, when do whole spices lose their potency?  Shipping to Egypt takes 4 to 5
months.  Sailing around Africa takes 8 or 9 months.

The Arabs sold primarily to the Venetians, who transhipped the spices to
Venice, then distributed them into Europe.  The Portuguese sold directly to
European spice dealers in Lisbon.  How do you factor the various delays?

And finally, I think the longest transit time in the European spice trade
would be in the final distribution to the cities of Europe where the spices
had to travel over land.  This would have been more difficult and time
consuming in the 8th Century than in the 16th.

All in all, I don't think there would be much difference in the ultimate
freshness at delivery throughout the SCA period.

BTW, double that 800 years.  The Arabs were in the spice trade almost that
long before Muhammad brought them to Islam.  The Romans cut out the Arab
middlemen from the 1st to 4th Centuries, but with Rome's decline, the Arabs
took back the trade.

Bear