English only · Odia translation in progress

Chapter 2: The Goods and the Routes

On the full moon of Kartik — sometime in late October or November, depending on the year — the banks of the Mahanadi in Cuttack fill with people. Families gather at the ghats before dawn. Children carry miniature boats fashioned from banana stems, sholapith, colored paper, and cork. The boats are called boitas. At first light, with lamps lit inside them, the children set the boitas on the water and watch them drift downriver toward the sea. This is Boita Bandana — the tying and launching of boats — and it is the opening ritual of Bali Yatra, the Voyage to Bali.

To a visitor, it looks like a charming folk tradition. A children’s game. Something between a festival and a craft project. But the ritual is encoded information. The date is not arbitrary — Kartik Purnima falls at the onset of the northeast monsoon, when the prevailing winds over the Bay of Bengal shift direction and blow steadily from the Indian coast toward Southeast Asia. The boats are not arbitrary — they are miniature replicas of the ocean-going boitas that once carried Odia merchants across open water to Suvarnabhumi, the Golden Land. The direction the boats drift is not arbitrary — it follows the same current and wind that would carry a fully loaded trading vessel from the Mahanadi delta toward the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, Java, and Bali.

What the children float on the river every November is a shipping manifest disguised as a toy. It records the departure date, the vessel type, the cargo direction, and the destination. It records the entire logic of a trading system that operated for roughly a thousand years, from the last centuries BCE to the thirteenth century CE, connecting the Kalinga coast to the civilizations of the eastern Indian Ocean. The system was not a series of adventurous voyages. It was an economy. It had goods, routes, schedules, merchants, ports, and a social infrastructure that organized the lives of thousands of families around the rhythm of the monsoon.

This chapter reconstructs that economy. What moved across the Bay of Bengal. How it moved. Who moved it. And on what scale.

The Monsoon Engine

Every trading system needs an engine. For the Bay of Bengal, the engine was the monsoon.

The monsoon is not a storm. It is a system — a continental-scale seasonal reversal of wind direction caused by the differential heating of land and ocean. In the northern Indian Ocean, this reversal produces two distinct wind regimes that are as reliable, in their broad patterns, as a railway timetable.

From October to December, the northeast monsoon blows. High-pressure systems over the Asian landmass push air outward and southwestward across the Bay of Bengal. The winds are steady, moderate, and favorable for sailing from the Indian coast toward Southeast Asia. This is the departure window. Ships that left the Kalinga coast in late October or November, riding the northeast monsoon, could expect to reach the Malay Peninsula or the Indonesian archipelago within weeks, depending on their route and whether they made intermediate stops.

From April to June, the pattern reverses. The southwest monsoon pushes moisture-laden air from the Indian Ocean northeast toward the Asian landmass. The same winds that bring rain to India bring ships back from Southeast Asia. This is the return window.

The round trip, therefore, was locked to a fixed annual cycle. A merchant who departed Kalinga on Kartik Purnima would not return until the following southwest monsoon season — roughly six to eight months later. The voyage to Southeast Asia and back was a full-year commitment. This was not a weekend trading run. It was a year out of a family’s life, with no communication between departure and return. The economic, social, and emotional architecture of the Sadhaba community was built around this rhythm.

The Greek-Egyptian geographer Ptolemy, writing around 150 CE, identified a specific point on the Kalinga coast that functioned as the critical node in this system. Near the port of Paloura — modern Palur, at the mouth of the Rushikulya River in Ganjam district — Ptolemy noted the Apheterion: the point of departure for the open-ocean crossing to Chryse, the “Golden Land,” which corresponds to Suvarnabhumi in Sanskrit — mainland and island Southeast Asia.

The Apheterion was not a symbolic label. It described a navigational reality. In the early centuries of the common era, large trading vessels did not typically cross the Bay of Bengal directly from Sri Lanka or the southern tip of India. The route was more cautious: ships hugged the eastern coast of India northward from Sri Lanka, past the Tamil ports, past the Andhra coast, to the Kalinga littoral. At Palur, or nearby Chelitalo (identified by the Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang as a major port from which ships sailed to Sri Lanka and China), they turned east and crossed the open ocean.

Why here? Because the Kalinga coast is the point on the Indian landmass that minimizes the open-water crossing to the northern tip of the Malay Peninsula and the islands beyond. North of Kalinga, you are heading into the Bay of Bengal’s widest expanse. South of Kalinga, you are sailing parallel to the Indian coast rather than across the bay. The geography of the coastline made Kalinga the logical launch point. Ptolemy did not invent this; he documented what the navigators already knew.

The navigational technology was sophisticated enough for the crossing but not for ignoring the monsoon. Indian Ocean vessels of this period used the stars, the color and smell of the water, the behavior of seabirds, the direction of swells, and the monsoon’s own regularity as their guidance system. An Arabic navigational tract from the fifteenth century — written more than a millennium after the peak of Kalingan trade — still mentions “Faradip” (Paradip, at the Mahanadi estuary) as a recognized landmark. The knowledge accumulated over centuries and was transmitted orally, from navigator to navigator, in traditions that left almost no written record but shaped the movements of thousands of vessels.

The monsoon did not merely permit trade. It structured it. The departure date was fixed by the wind. The return date was fixed by the wind. The goods that could be traded were constrained by what would survive a year in transit. The merchants who could participate were those whose finances and family arrangements could absorb a year-long absence. The monsoon was not background to the trade; it was the trade’s operating system.

What Kalinga Sent East

A trading system is ultimately about goods. What did the boitas carry when they sailed east from the Kalinga coast on the northeast monsoon?

The answer begins with cloth.

Kalingam cloth was one of the most recognized trade goods in the Bay of Bengal world. The name itself tells the story — “Kalingam” became a generic term in Southeast Asian markets for high-quality blue cotton fabric, the way “champagne” became a generic term for sparkling wine. The branding was geographical: this cloth came from Kalinga, and the name stuck so thoroughly that it outlasted the trading system that created it. Indian textiles — specifically fine cotton, muslin, and printed or dyed fabrics — were traded to Southeast Asia for nearly two thousand years, serving not merely as clothing but as wedding dowry, ritual objects, ceremonial dress, and in some contexts, currency. The textile trade was not a minor sideline. It was, for extended periods, the dominant flow of goods from India eastward.

Kalinga was well positioned for textile production. The river deltas of the Mahanadi, Brahmani, and Baitarani provided the water and the alluvial soil for cotton cultivation. The weaving traditions of the Odia hinterland — traditions that survive today in the Sambalpuri and Bomkai textiles of western and southern Odisha — are descendants of a craft culture that once produced export-grade cloth at scale. The fine muslins and silks that moved through Kalingan ports included both locally produced goods and re-exports from other Indian regions, particularly silk from Bengal and the north.

Beyond textiles, the cargo manifest of a Kalingan boita might have included:

Diamonds and precious stones. Odisha was a historical source of diamonds — the Mahanadi and its tributaries yielded alluvial diamonds, and the region’s geological profile includes kimberlite pipes. The diamond trade from eastern India predates the modern association of diamonds with South Africa by many centuries. Precious and semi-precious stones — carnelian, agate, chalcedony — moved through Kalingan ports as well, though the primary bead-making center for the Indian Ocean trade was Gujarat’s Khambhat (Cambay), and distinguishing specifically Kalingan bead production from the broader Indian bead trade remains an archaeological challenge.

Elephants. This may seem improbable as a maritime export, but it was one of the most important. Kalinga was famous across the ancient world for its war elephants — the Hathigumpha inscription of Kharavela references the “catumga” army, the fourfold force that included elephant corps. Sri Lanka was a major market. The island kingdom needed elephants for warfare and ceremonial purposes and imported them from the nearest source across the water. Transporting elephants by ship was a known practice in the Indian Ocean; the logistics were difficult but not impossible, and the value per unit was high enough to justify the effort.

Iron implements. Odisha was — and remains — one of India’s most significant iron-producing regions. The iron ore deposits of what is now Keonjhar, Sundargarh, and Mayurbhanj fueled metalworking traditions that produced tools, weapons, and agricultural implements for export. The excavations at Manikapatna recovered iron harpoons, spearheads, sickles, fish hooks, and notably, boat nails — along with iron slags indicating that metalworking was carried out at the port itself. Iron was both a finished export and an industrial input for the maritime economy: the ships themselves were iron-nailed.

Ivory and animal products. The forested hinterland of Kalinga provided ivory, which was carved into ornaments and religious objects for both domestic use and export.

Agricultural goods. Rice, from the fertile deltas. Betel nuts, pepper, long pepper, cinnamon — spices that moved both eastward to Southeast Asia and westward through Indian Ocean networks to the Roman and Arab worlds. Forest products from the Eastern Ghats: aromatic woods, resins, medicinal plants.

Religious artifacts and texts. This category defies easy quantification, but it may have been the most consequential export of all. Buddhist texts, religious sculptures, votive objects, and the knowledge carried in the minds of monks and scholars traveled on the same ships that carried cotton and iron. The Diamond Triangle monasteries — Ratnagiri, Udayagiri, and Lalitgiri in Jajpur district — were active centers of Mahayana and later Vajrayana Buddhism from the fifth through the twelfth century CE. Manuscripts and mandalas from these institutions circulated through the same maritime networks that moved goods, reaching Java, Sumatra, and beyond. An eighth-century Vajrayana text copied at Ratnagiri and a bolt of Kalingam cloth loaded at Chelitalo might have traveled on the same boita.

What Kalinga Received

The return voyage, riding the southwest monsoon from April to June, brought a different cargo.

Gold. The name says it all — Suvarnabhumi, the Golden Land, Suvarnadvipa, the Golden Island. These Sanskrit terms for mainland and island Southeast Asia were not poetic metaphors. They described the primary commodity that Indian merchants sought in the east. Gold from the Malay Peninsula, gold from Sumatra, gold from the rivers and mines of the archipelago: this was what balanced the trade. Indian textiles and manufactured goods moved east. Gold moved west. The trade deficit, from the Southeast Asian perspective, was covered in metal.

Tin. The Malay Peninsula was one of the ancient world’s richest sources of tin — a metal essential for making bronze. Tin from what is now Malaysia and Thailand moved through Indian ports and was re-exported westward to the Mediterranean world. Kalingan ports were intermediaries in this flow.

Aromatic goods. Camphor from Borneo and Sumatra. Sandalwood from Timor and other eastern islands. Cloves from the Moluccas. Aromatic woods and resins that commanded premium prices in Indian, Arab, and Roman markets. The spice trade is often associated with the Malabar coast of western India, but the eastern routes carried their own aromatic cargoes, and Kalingan ports were waypoints in these flows.

From Sri Lanka: Pearls and gems. The pearl fisheries of the Palk Strait and the gem deposits of the Sri Lankan highlands produced luxury goods that moved northward along the coast to Kalinga and beyond. Silver, too, came from the island.

From China: Silk — the commodity that gave the overland trade route its name moved by sea as well. Chinese porcelain, which has survived in the archaeological record because ceramics are nearly indestructible, provides some of the clearest evidence of long-distance trade. At Manikapatna, excavators recovered Chinese celadon ware and porcelain fragments from the Yuan and Ming dynasties (thirteenth to seventeenth century CE), confirming that Chinese goods reached the Chilika coast over an extended period. Chinese coins from the fourteenth century were also recovered — small bronze discs with square holes that circulated as currency across the Chinese trading world.

From the Roman and Mediterranean world: This is where the Manikapatna excavations become genuinely cosmopolitan. Amphora fragments — pieces of the large ceramic vessels in which Romans shipped wine and olive oil — were recovered from the site. Roman terracotta bullion and lamps turned up. At Palur, Roman rouletted ware — the distinctive pottery that is one of the most reliable markers of early historic Indian Ocean trade — was found alongside Chinese celadon. These goods did not necessarily travel directly from Rome to Kalinga. They moved through intermediary ports — Arikamedu in Tamil Nadu, Mantai in Sri Lanka, the Red Sea ports of Egypt — reaching the Kalinga coast as part of a relay system in which goods changed hands multiple times across thousands of miles.

The total picture is not a bilateral trade route but a network. Kalinga did not trade exclusively with Southeast Asia, or with Sri Lanka, or with China, or with the Roman Mediterranean. It traded with all of them, sometimes directly, sometimes through intermediaries, and the ports of the Kalinga coast served as nodes where goods from multiple origins converged, were stored, repackaged, and re-exported. Manikapatna is the clearest archaeological expression of this: it is the only site on India’s east coast from which such a diverse range of ceramics and artifacts — Indian, Roman, Chinese, Arab, Sri Lankan — has been recovered from a single excavation.

The Sadhabas: A Merchant Civilization

The goods did not move themselves. They were moved by people, and the people who moved them constituted a distinct social class in Odia society: the Sadhabas.

The word itself — sadhaba or sadhava — appears in inscriptions, literary texts, and oral traditions. At Manikapatna, an inscribed pendant bearing the name “Sadabhu Tisha” was recovered from layers palaeographically dated to the Mauryan period, around the third century BCE. This is not a casual mention. It is a personal artifact — a pendant, worn on the body — bearing a name that identifies its owner with the merchant-sailor class. By the Mauryan period, the Sadhabas were already a recognizable social category with enough identity to mark their personal possessions.

Who were they? The Sadhabas were not sailors in the modern sense — hired crew aboard someone else’s ship. They were merchant-mariners: traders who organized, financed, and physically undertook the voyages themselves. Think of them as the venture capitalists and the ship captains rolled into one. They raised the capital for the voyage, purchased the cargo, arranged the vessel, hired the crew, navigated the crossing, negotiated the trades at the destination, and brought the profits home. The risk was concentrated in the same hands as the reward.

Their organization resembled the guild structures found in other parts of ancient and medieval India. Merchant guilds — sreni or nigama — are well attested in Indian inscriptions from the early centuries CE. These were not informal associations. They had rules, leaders, collective funds, and the capacity to negotiate with kings and regulatory authorities on behalf of their members. The Sadhabas of the Kalinga coast appear to have operated within similar structures, though the specific details of their guild organization are less well documented than those of, say, the merchant guilds of western India.

The ritual calendar of the Sadhaba community was organized around the monsoon. Boita Bandana — the departure ceremony — was the defining event of the annual cycle. It was not merely a send-off. It was a ritual of commissioning, with prayers, offerings, and ceremonies that invoked divine protection for the voyage. The women of the Sadhaba households played a central role: they performed the Boita Bandana puja, offered prayers for safe passage, and managed the household economy during the merchant’s year-long absence.

This last point deserves emphasis. A year-long voyage meant that the Sadhaba economy was, in practice, a dual economy. The men conducted the maritime trade — the high-risk, high-reward, geographically distant enterprise. The women managed everything else — the household, the local trade, the children, the agricultural land, the social relationships that sustained the family’s position in the community. The Sadhaba wife was not waiting passively for her husband’s return. She was running a parallel economic operation on land while he ran one at sea. The annual departure and return created a rhythm of autonomy and reunion that shaped gender roles, family structures, and social expectations within the community.

The social status of the Sadhabas in Odia society was high. Maritime trade was not considered a marginal or low-status occupation. The Jataka tales — Buddhist literary texts compiled from around the fourth century BCE — are full of stories about merchants undertaking sea voyages, and they are heroes, not marginal figures. The Sadhabas were prosperous enough to command respect, adventurous enough to command admiration, and pious enough — many funded temples, monasteries, and religious institutions — to command spiritual authority. In the social imagination of ancient and medieval Odisha, the Sadhaba was a figure of considerable stature: worldly, wealthy, brave, and connected to a reality far larger than the village or the local kingdom.

The Bali Yatra festival preserves this status in cultural memory. When modern Odia families float miniature boitas on Kartik Purnima, they are not commemorating common sailors. They are commemorating an entrepreneurial class that combined capital, courage, navigation, and cross-cultural negotiation into an integrated way of life. The Sadhabas were, in the language of modern business, vertically integrated: they controlled the supply chain from procurement to final sale, and they bore the full risk of the enterprise.

What killed the Sadhaba class — the shift in trade routes, the rise of Arab and later European maritime power, the colonial reorientation of Indian Ocean commerce — is the subject of a later chapter. But the social infrastructure they built lasted long enough to leave permanent marks on Odia culture, language, and self-understanding. The memory of the Sadhabas is not academic. It is personal. In many Odia families, particularly in the coastal districts, the Sadhaba identity is part of the family’s understanding of who they are and where they came from.

The Port System

Trade routes converge at ports, and the Kalinga coast had a chain of them — strung along the coastline from the Ganges delta in the north to the Godavari in the south, each serving a distinct hinterland and handling different segments of the maritime traffic. Understanding the port system is essential to understanding the trade, because the ports were not interchangeable. Each had its own geography, its own connections, and its own specialization.

Tamralipti — modern Tamluk, now in West Bengal but historically part of the greater Kalingan trading network — was the northernmost of the major ports and, for much of the ancient period, the most important. Located near the mouth of the Hooghly, Tamralipti was the gateway from the Gangetic plains to the sea. Goods from Magadha, Varanasi, and the entire northern Indian hinterland funneled through Tamralipti for maritime export. The Chinese pilgrim Xuanzang mentioned it. Buddhist texts reference it repeatedly. Faxian, the Chinese pilgrim who traveled to India around 399-414 CE, used Tamralipti as his embarkation point for the return voyage to China. For overland travelers from northern India, Tamralipti was where the road ended and the ocean began. Its decline came gradually, as the Hooghly River silted and shifted, stranding the port away from navigable water — a fate that would later befall Satgaon and contribute to the rise of Calcutta.

Chelitalo — identified by Xuanzang during his visit around 638 CE as a port from which ships sailed to Simhala (Sri Lanka) and China — was a key departure point for the Bay of Bengal crossing. The exact location is debated but is generally placed near the Manikapatna area on the Chilika Lake coast. Xuanzang’s reference is significant because it confirms that, as late as the seventh century CE, the Kalinga coast was a primary maritime link not just to Southeast Asia but to China — a direct connection to the world’s largest contemporary economy. The goods that flowed through Chelitalo were cosmopolitan: silk and porcelain inbound from China, cotton and religious artifacts outbound to Sri Lanka and beyond.

Manikapatna — at the mouth of the Satapada ghat on Chilika Lake, in Puri district — is the most archaeologically documented port on the Kalinga coast, thanks to the OIMSEAS (Odishan Institute of Maritime and Southeast Asian Studies) excavations of 1989-1993 and the Deccan College re-excavation of 2010. Manikapatna’s significance lies not just in its antiquity but in its cosmopolitanism. The excavation revealed two distinct phases of occupation:

Phase I, spanning the second century BCE to the fifth or sixth century CE, yielded rouletted ware, knobbed ware, amphora fragments, Roman terracotta, Puri-Kushana coins, a Kharosthi inscription on a potsherd (indicating contact with northwest India or Central Asia), and the “Sadabhu Tisha” pendant. Phase II, spanning the ninth to nineteenth century CE, yielded Rajaraja Chola coins, Sri Lankan Sahassamalla coins, Chinese coins and porcelain from the Yuan and Ming dynasties, and Arabic glazed pottery. An Indo-Arabian stone anchor found along the coast was geochemically traced — through petrographic analysis, major and trace element chemistry, and strontium-neodymium isotopic ratios — to a basalt lava flow at Palitana in Saurashtra, Gujarat. A stone anchor from the west coast of India, lying on the east coast, is physical proof of coastal connectivity.

The range of artifacts at Manikapatna is, as the excavation reports note, unique on India’s east coast. No other single site has yielded Roman, Chinese, Arabic, and Sri Lankan goods together. This was not a provincial fishing harbor. It was a cosmopolitan entrepot where the maritime worlds of the Mediterranean, South Asia, East Asia, and the Arab trading sphere converged.

Palur — Ptolemy’s Paloura, near the mouth of the Rushikulya River in Ganjam district — occupies a unique position in the historical record because Ptolemy specifically identified it as the location of the Apheterion, the departure point for the crossing to Chryse (Southeast Asia). Archaeological exploration has yielded Chinese celadon ware, Roman rouletted pottery, and amphora fragments. S. Levi identified Ptolemy’s Paloura with the Dantapura of Buddhist texts (the city from which the Tooth Relic of the Buddha was sent to Sri Lanka) and the Dandagula of Pliny. If these identifications are correct, Palur was not just a trade port but a city of religious significance — a place where Buddhist artifacts and commercial goods departed on the same ships. A village named Palur still exists at the Rushikulya estuary, unremarkable to the passing traveler, layered with two thousand years of documented commerce.

Kalingapatnam — on the coast of what is now Srikakulam district in Andhra Pradesh, near the mouth of the Vamsadhara River — carries the name of Kalinga itself, the clearest possible signal of its identity. This was the southern end of the Kalinga port chain, and archaeological evidence confirms port activities stretching back to the early historic period. Its position, south of the other major Kalingan ports, made it a natural waypoint for ships moving along the coast between Tamil Nadu and Kalinga.

Pithunda — whose exact location is debated but is generally placed near the Chicacola/Srikakulam area — appears in some of the earliest textual references to Kalingan maritime activity. The Jain text Uttaradhyana Sutra describes Pithunda as an important center frequented by merchants from Champa — ancient Vietnam — which, if accurate, represents one of the earliest documented trade connections between the Kalinga coast and mainland Southeast Asia. Kharavela’s Hathigumpha inscription records that in his eleventh regnal year, he conquered Pithunda, destroying the city and “ploughing it with a plough yoked to asses” after defeating the Tamil confederacy. The destruction of a port city by a Kalingan king is an ironic detail — Kharavela was powerful enough to destroy the trade infrastructure of rival ports, even though his own kingdom’s prosperity depended on the same maritime system.

Dosarene — mentioned in the Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (mid-first century CE) and by Ptolemy — is identified as one of the flourishing ports on the Kalinga coast. The Periplus is a merchant’s guide, written in Greek by someone with firsthand knowledge of Indian Ocean trade routes, and its mention of a Kalingan port confirms that by the first century CE, the Kalinga coast was known to Mediterranean commercial networks. The Periplus is more detailed about western India than the east coast, but the inclusion of Dosarene indicates that east coast ports were significant enough to warrant notice in a guide aimed at Greco-Roman merchants.

The Paradip area — at the Mahanadi estuary — rounds out the system with evidence spanning the early medieval to late medieval period. A ninth-century Avalokiteshvara image recovered from the area indicates Buddhist maritime worship. An eleventh-century image of Goddess Oddiyani Marichi from nearby Marichpur was worshipped by sailors and traders seeking safe voyages — a patron deity of the maritime class, the Sadhaba equivalent of a church dedicated to St. Christopher. A fifteenth-century Persian navigational tract mentions “Faradip,” confirming that the site was known to Arab and Persian navigators five centuries after its Buddhist heyday.

Read as a system, the Kalinga ports formed a chain that served different functions and different hinterlands. Tamralipti linked the Gangetic plains to the sea. The Mahanadi estuary ports (Paradip area) served the central Odia heartland. Manikapatna and Chelitalo, on or near Chilika Lake, were the cosmopolitan hubs where the widest range of international goods converged. Palur was the departure point for the open-ocean crossing. Kalingapatnam and Pithunda served the southern Kalinga coast and its connections to the Tamil world and Champa. Dosarene was known well enough to appear in Greek navigational literature. This was not a single port with a single function. It was an integrated system, a chain of specialized nodes that together made the Kalinga coast one of the primary maritime interfaces between India and the eastern world.

The Scale of It

It is easy, when listing goods and ports and monsoon schedules, to lose the sense of scale. The modern mind, accustomed to container ships carrying twenty thousand TEUs across the Pacific, may imagine the ancient Bay of Bengal trade as quaint — a few boats, a few bolts of cloth, an exotic sideline to the “real” economy of agriculture and land revenue.

This would be wrong.

Consider the name. The Bay of Bengal was, in certain periods and in certain sources, called the Sea of Kalinga. A body of water 2.17 million square kilometers in area, the largest bay in the world, was identified with a single kingdom on its western shore. Oceans and seas are named after the powers that dominate them — the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea, the Sea of Japan. That the Bay of Bengal carried Kalinga’s name, even informally and in limited sources, is an indicator of perceived dominance.

Consider the linguistic evidence. In the Malay world, before the English word “India” was introduced, the Indian subcontinent was called Benua Keling — the land of Keling, the land of Kalinga. Not Benua Chola. Not Benua Magadha. Kalinga. An entire subcontinent identified by one of its eastern coastal kingdoms, because that was the kingdom whose merchants the Malays had encountered most often and earliest. In Cambodia, to this day, the colloquial Khmer term for a person of Indian descent is Kleng — a cognate of Keling, a cognate of Kalinga. These are not antiquarian curiosities. They are fossilized evidence of who was showing up at Southeast Asian ports in sufficient numbers, for sufficient centuries, to define the identity of an entire foreign civilization.

Consider the textile trade specifically. Indian textiles were traded to Southeast Asia for roughly two thousand years — from the last centuries BCE to the colonial period. This was not occasional commerce. It was structural. Indian cloth was woven into the social fabric of Southeast Asian societies at the deepest level: it served as wedding dowry, ritual offering, ceremonial dress, diplomatic gift, and in some island communities, as a medium of exchange — effectively, currency. The textile flow was so persistent and so embedded in local custom that the arrival of European colonial traders in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries did not initially displace it. The Dutch East India Company, entering the Indonesian market, discovered that it could not sell European cloth there. What the market wanted was Indian cloth — the same Indian cloth that had been arriving for a millennium. The VOC ended up becoming an intermediary in the Indian textile trade to Indonesia rather than displacing it with Dutch products. This is not marginal commerce. This is a trade flow so deeply embedded that a colonial superpower had to accommodate it rather than replace it.

Consider, finally, the Manikapatna evidence. Roman amphora fragments. Chinese porcelain. Arabic glazed pottery. Sri Lankan coins. Chola coins. Kushana coins. All from a single site on the Chilika coast. This is not the archaeological profile of a small fishing village that occasionally received foreign visitors. It is the profile of a node in a global trading system — a place where goods from the Mediterranean, the Persian Gulf, South Asia, East Asia, and the Malay world converged physically, in the same warehouses, at the same quays. The Roman wine merchant, the Chinese porcelain trader, the Arab spice dealer, and the Kalingan cotton exporter were, at various points in the port’s long history, doing business within walking distance of each other.

The Bay of Bengal maritime system was one of the great trading systems of the premodern world. It connected civilizations across thousands of miles of open water. And the Kalinga coast, for a significant portion of that system’s lifespan, was not a peripheral participant but a central node — the departure point for the crossing, the source of the textiles, the homeland of the merchants, and the place whose name the bay itself sometimes carried.

It is difficult to establish precise quantitative measures for the scale of this trade — we do not have tonnage figures or customs receipts from the second century BCE. The evidence is necessarily indirect: the distribution of pottery sherds, the frequency of coin finds, the persistence of linguistic fossils, the durability of cultural practices like Bali Yatra. But all of these indicators point in the same direction. This was trade at civilizational scale, conducted over civilizational timespans, with consequences that outlasted the trade itself by centuries.

The Missing Manifests

A note of honesty is required here, consistent with the principle that credibility is a resource that cannot be spent recklessly.

Much of what is claimed about Kalinga’s maritime trade rests on inference rather than direct documentation. We have no surviving cargo manifests from Kalingan boitas. We have no ship’s logs, no merchant account books, no customs records. We have no confirmed ancient shipwreck specifically attributed to a Kalingan vessel — the Godavaya shipwreck off Sri Lanka (second century BCE to first century CE), with its cargo of Indian iron ingots and glass, demonstrates the material reality of Indian Ocean trade but cannot be linked to Kalinga specifically.

The archaeological evidence at sites like Manikapatna and Palur is strong but geographically limited. Much of the Kalinga coastline remains archaeologically unexplored. Systematic survey and excavation of potential port sites could dramatically expand — or in some cases, complicate — the current understanding. The OIMSEAS excavations of 1989-1993 at Manikapatna remain the most substantial archaeological work on a Kalingan port, and even that work is now more than three decades old.

The textual evidence — Ptolemy, the Periplus, Xuanzang, the Jatakas — is invaluable but not comprehensive. The Periplus is more detailed about western India than the east coast. Ptolemy’s geographical data, while remarkably accurate in some respects, contains errors and ambiguities. The Jatakas are literary texts, not shipping records. Distinguishing specifically Kalingan contributions to Bay of Bengal trade from the broader “east coast Indian” trade network — which included Tamil, Andhra, and Bengali ports — requires more evidence than currently exists.

Popular narratives about Kalinga’s maritime glory sometimes exceed the archaeological evidence. The claim that the Sailendra dynasty of Java originated from Kalinga, proposed by R.C. Majumdar in 1933, is no longer accepted by most modern scholars. The claim that the Kalinga script is the direct ancestor of Southeast Asian writing systems is incorrect — the Pallava script, from the Tamil country, is the established ancestor. The claim that Kalinga “civilized” Southeast Asia overstates India’s role and understates the sophistication and agency of Southeast Asian societies, which were not blank slates waiting to be inscribed by Indian traders.

What can be said with confidence is this: Kalinga was one of the most important Indian nodes in a Bay of Bengal trading system that lasted over a millennium. Kalingan merchants were prominent enough for Southeast Asians to use the name “Kalinga” as a synonym for India itself. Specific, documented transfers — the Tooth Relic from Dantapura, the founding narrative of Champa’s first dynasty, the linguistic fingerprints of Ravana Chhaya shadow puppetry in Javanese Wayang — point to real and sustained connections. The scale of the trade, while not precisely quantifiable, was large enough to leave permanent marks in the archaeological record, in language, and in living cultural practice.

The gap between what we know and what we claim is itself informative. It suggests that the Kalinga coast has been under-researched relative to its historical importance — a pattern that echoes, in the archaeological domain, the broader pattern of Odisha receiving less institutional attention than its significance warrants.

Bali Yatra as Living Archive

Return, finally, to the riverbank at Cuttack.

Bali Yatra is not merely a folk festival. It is Asia’s largest open-air trade fair. Over seven days, it draws more than seven million visitors. Vendors set up stalls stretching for kilometers along the Mahanadi. Goods are bought and sold — earthenware, handicrafts, food, household items — in a bazaar that is, in its commercial energy if not its geographical reach, the direct descendant of the market culture that once sustained the Sadhaba economy. The fair is both a memorial and a continuation: it commemorates a trading system that no longer exists while demonstrating that the impulse behind it — to gather, to trade, to connect — has not died.

The festival is also, in its quiet way, an act of defiance against forgetting. The Bali Yatra ritual encodes in the bodies of children and the floating of toy boats a memory that predates writing. The northeast monsoon departure date. The boita vessel form. The eastward direction. The connection to Bali, Java, Sumatra, and beyond. No school textbook is required to transmit this information. A grandmother sets a banana-stem boat on the river and tells a grandchild where the Sadhabas sailed, and the knowledge passes forward another generation. The mechanism is ritual, not literacy, and it has proven more durable than either stone inscriptions or scholarly monographs.

The gap between the toy boat and the ocean vessel is the measure of what was lost. The children floating miniature boitas on the Mahanadi are not aware, most of them, that the boats they play with represent a class of ocean-going vessels that once connected their city to a world stretching from Sri Lanka to China. They do not know that the date on which they perform this ritual was chosen because the monsoon wind on that day would carry a real boat toward the Golden Land. They do not know that the name of the festival — Bali Yatra, the Voyage to Bali — is not a metaphor but a destination.

But the river knows. And the wind knows. And the ritual, in its quiet persistence across centuries, has carried the information forward to a time when it might, perhaps, be needed again.

Sources

Archaeological and excavation reports:

OIMSEAS trial excavations at Manikapatna, 1989-1993
Deccan College re-excavation of Manikapatna, 2010
Smith, M.L. and Mohanty, R., “Archaeology at Sisupalgarh” (UCLA/Deccan College)
Tripati, S. et al., “Geochemical provenance of an Indo-Arabian stone anchor from Manikapatna,” Scientific Reports (Nature), 2022
Tripati, S. et al., “Indo-Arabian Stone Anchor of Manikapatna, Odisha,” Current Science

Classical and medieval texts:

Ptolemy, Geography (c. 150 CE), McCrindle translation — identification of Paloura and the Apheterion
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (mid-1st century CE), Schoff translation — references to Dosarene
Xuanzang, Si-Yu-Ki (Records of the Western Regions), Beal and Watters translations — references to Chelitalo
Hathigumpha Inscription of Kharavela (2nd-1st century BCE) — references to Pithunda and military power
Jataka tales (compiled c. 4th century BCE onward) — Baveru Jataka, Suppuraka Jataka, and others
Uttaradhyana Sutra (Jain text) — merchants from Champa trading at Pithunda

Key scholarly works:

Tripati, S., “Monsoon wind and maritime trade: A case study of historical evidence from Orissa, India,” National Institute of Oceanography, Goa
Ford, L.A. et al., “Revisiting Indian Rouletted Ware and the impact of Indian Ocean trade,” Antiquity
Calo, A. et al., “Sembiran and Pacung on the north coast of Bali,” Antiquity
Bellina, B., “Beads, social change and interaction between India and South-east Asia”
Carter, A.K., “Geologic provenience analysis of agate and carnelian beads,” Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 2016
McCrindle, J.W., “Ancient India as Described by Ptolemy”
Patra, B., “Archaeology and the Maritime History of Ancient Orissa”

Government and institutional publications:

“Ports in Ancient Odisha: Historical Perspective,” Odisha Review, November 2014
“Maritime Trade of Ancient Kalinga,” Odisha Review, November 2011
“Kalinga and China: A Study in Ancient Relations,” Odisha Review, July 2014
UNESCO World Heritage Centre, Tentative List: “Serial Nomination of Buddhist Triangle Sites of Odisha”

Next: Chapter 3 — The Civilization They Carried

Source Research

The raw research that informs this series.