The Roman Economy

Vampire

>>2894386
Oiikeic

>>2894386

From what I can vaguely remember from my studies some people believe that the Roman Empire had something called a tributary economy, which is what more modern empires are believe to have had, like the Mughal and Ching.

Walter Scheidel is a big name, also Finley.

Why not capitalism? Wages were paid and private property definitely existed.

>>2894386

You ask for early republic (pre-Marius)? Late republic/early empire?

If the latter, it has been described as plunder economy. The state's expenditures (principally the army) could no way be matched by normal taxation. No state was capable to sustain such burden until the rise of modern centralized states in 17th century.

To sustain itself, Rome had to plunder some place, be it some poor buggers who were conquered and robbed blind or some province squeezed by tax farmers.

Meanwhile the absolute majority of Rome's population were sustenance farmers or city pleb who worked occasionally.

>>2894386
a bunch of tributary provinces that pay tributes to the local legion
Imagine like sparta only on a larger scale

File: image.jpg (817KB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

817KB, 2592x1936px

>>2894520
Ha, I just used him as one of my three examples of interdisciplinary studies in classics for my end of year paper. His comparisons between China and Rome are fascinating.

I wrote about eunuchs in Byzantium and China

Slavery

>>2894552
Capitalism in the traditional sense of merchants and goods isn't really a good way to define an economy. It wasn't until the rise of communism that it was feasible to see capitalism as anything other as a natural part of society that everyone embraced.

File: 1492968355844.jpg (90KB, 698x872px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 698x872px

>>2895193
Shut the fuck up anon.

File: 1487280354820.jpg (15KB, 319x331px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 319x331px

>>2895179
Of course a chan writes about eunuchs

>>2895209
Nice meme i like
very butthurt so rekt xD
looks like my argument is defeated

>>2894386
Extremely dysfunctional. They had massive unemployment rates because of slavery, which eliminated most working class jobs and severely depressed wages for free Romans. Instead of reforming this, they expanded this train wreck and started having to blow more and more of the state treasury on bribes to the general populace to keep them from open revolt. Exorbitant gladiatorial games and other forms of entertainment, insane numbers of public holidays and food handouts, etc. Tax system was also a clusterfuck.

Without the constant expansion and extractive arrangements with client states they would've collapsed under the weight of their financial obligations and widespread unrest much sooner than IRL.

>>2894386

Hmm while the Romans would not have the exact concept of a state as you or I would know it. They had a state controlled economy. One built largely on slavery and plunder. Most kingdoms and empires of the time were like this but once they ran out of plundering to do, they couldnt keep it up.

Other important points:

-Their tax collectors had to pay to get the role so you can imagine how efficient the taxation policies were
-Many nobles moved production and capital to the countryside, establishing a villa based economy
-Food was heavily subsidized in rome
-Rome frequently tried to save their economy by minting less valuable coins and stopping trade in certain luxury items as well as capping pay for certain salaries
-All historical maps always show a bolded colour like its a video game but the actual land rome directly controlled was very small in comparison. Most of that is under only nominal control or vassal kings who just did 90% of the work running their little corner.

>>2894386
Pre post southern plantation chattel slavery economy with citizenship