Re: On the old amber road?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Torsten" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
(GK)  Pliny NH, 37

adfertur a Germanis in Pannoniam maxime provinciam, et inde Veneti primum, quos Enetos Graeci vocaverunt, famam rei fecere proximique Pannoniae et agentes circa mare Hadriaticum....
> >
> > GK: So since Nero Carnuntum was the port of transit for the amber traffic from the north to Roma.
>
>
> As the result of that expedition, yes.
> And before, it might have been Nauportus
> >
> >
> > For the 'amber road' an alternative river route would include rivers
> > like
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dniepr
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_river
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Bug
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Bug
> >
> > GK: especially in the earlier period, before Roman ascendancy,
> > when there were other important Hellenistic centers eager to acquire
> > amber. Cf. generally:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amber_Road%c3%82%c2%a0
>
>
> My point still stands (I think):
> The socalled 'amber road' before the expedition in Nero's time went to the Black Sea, not to the Adriatic. That's also why I think Roman grave goods in Germanic graves came that way.

****GK: Note that Pliny implies that the amber which reached Rome came to the Pannonian area even before Nero (with the Veneti as importers to Italy). So your point would be that from the Black Sea the "road" then (partly) curved back westward via the Danube and eventually reached Nauportus? But why not use the Moravian gate if one headed towards Pannonia? Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravian_Gate

Or other rivers (with a transcarpathian hop Cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dukla_Pass
There needn't be (and wasn't I believe a single amber road)...****