History of Commercial Culture and Society

Unit 4: The Romans

and Their Lasting Legacy
Degree in Marketing, Spring Term, Academic Year 2021–22.
Jorge Fernández-Santos Ortiz-Iribas
[email protected]
The birth of Rome is traditionally dated in 753 BCE, the year in which Romulus killed his brother Remus. This first
settlement was situated 18 km upstream the Tiber mouth. Although it is a fact often overlooked, this site was ideally
suited for TRADE:

—it was close enough to the Etruscans, Rome’s neighbours to the north, known to cultivate vines and
olive trees and to make advanced weapons and high-quality ceramic
—to the south stood the Latins, a people of shepherds and peasants
—upstream on the other side of the Apennine mountains various tribes lived off hunting and pasturage
—downstream, from the harbour of Ostia and the Tiber mouth, it was possible to sail to the coastal Greek
cities on the Italian peninsula and Sicily (the so-called ‘Magna Graecia’) and to the north African and
southern Iberian Phoenician colonies

Given this exceptional location, in the early stages of their development Romans thrived thanks to the profits derived
from trade and not from the booty of war.

Rome was naturally protected behind the defensive barrier of SEVEN HILLS; trade took place on the valley bed and
along the river. From the very beginning, the central position of the Palatine Hill was vested with enormous strategic
value, forcing the settlements on each of the seven hills to cooperate.

In 509 BCE Rome transitioned from tyranny to Republic. During the REPUBLICAN PERIOD Roman citizens created
and maintained a CITIZEN MILITIA that, not unlike the hoplites in the Greek poleis (see Unit 3), was in charge of
defending the city. Two praetors (later called consuls), elected yearly by an assembly of citizens, ruled.
Rome annexed hamlets and villages along the Tiber giving shape to a state in which free citizens — landowners who
enrolled in military service — enjoyed economic and political privileges.
Once embarked on a policy of TERRITORIAL EXPANSION, Rome annexed other cities, initially within Latium, either
by PACT or by CONQUEST. These cities were granted the right to trade on an equal status with Rome. Mixed
marriages between Latins and Romans were designed to foster integration. Deities and rituals were viewed as part of
a shared legacy. Indeed, right from the beginning, Romans showed a marked tendency towards RELIGIOUS
SYNCRETISM.

The expansionism of what soon became a TERRITORIAL LATIN LEAGUE in the centre of the Italian peninsula made it
inevitable for Rome to clash with the Greek cities of southern Italy and Sicily. Eventually, and thanks to its powerful
army, the Roman Republic managed to take over these cities, which contributed to expand further Rome’s trade
network. The city-states of the Magna Graecia, modelled after the independent Greek poleis, were used to trading
throughout the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Once included within the Latin League controlled by Rome,
merchants from these cities shared in the trade privileges enjoyed by Latin cities and found themselves placed under
the protection that ROMAN LAW extended to property rights and to the enforcement of contracts.

Merchants trading under the aegis of Rome were more and more likely to run into conflict with Phoenician enclaves
and colonies in the western Mediterranean. Conflicts escalated into full-blown war. There were three PUNIC WARS
pitting Rome against Carthage (264 to 146 BCE).

The Battle of Corinth in 146 BCE marks the beginning of a ‘Roman’ Greece: the once independent Greek city-states
were placed under Roman protectorate.

Rome’s victory in the Punic Wars (264-241, 218-201 and 149-146 BCE) and the destruction of Carthage sealed the
fate of the Mediterranean as a Roman sea. Romans rightly called it ‘our sea’ (MARE NOSTRUM). The fall of Rome
centuries later put an end to a truly unique case: a single power had control for the first and last time in history over
the three shores of the Mediterranean — northern or European, southern or African and eastern or Levantine.
 ECONOMIC PROSPERITY IN THE EARLY EMPIRE
As was the case for all the societies of Antiquity, AGRICULTURE remained the leading sector of the economy. Some
calculate that its weight was twenty times that of trade and industry combined.
As a result of Rome’s eastern conquests and expansion, GREEKS and SYRIANS arrived to the western shores of the
Mediterranean. Initially slaves, many soon became freedmen. Their knowledge helped raise the level of Roman
manufacture and also furthered the taste of elite Romans for refined eastern products.
Roman social prejudice against trade notwithstanding, there was no shortage of upper-class businessmen organised
in ‘societates’ that profited from commerce. In truth, Romans despised small, detail commerce but did not look down
on large commercial operations. Cicero for one wrote disparagingly about manual work and small tradesmen and
pedlars. It is no wonder that such activities ended up in the hands of foreigners and freedmen. We are, on the other
hand, informed about the Domitians, a family that controlled and nearly monopolised for a century (AD 50-150) the
fabrication of bricks on the Italian peninsula. Their heyday coincided with the rule of the Antonine emperors to whom
they were related. Yet it must be said that large enterprises were more the exception than the rule in the Roman
Empire. Free workers and the regulation of labour in the various industries were not a common occurrence. In other
words, slave labour and a deregulated job market were the norm.

The positive effects of the first emperor Augustus’ reign:

—quickening of economic activity —higher standard of living
—expansion of trade
Pliny remembers that Rome traded with India, China and Arabia. Aquileia traded with the Danubian territories, with
Istria and Noricum. Prosperous Italian areas were those of Campania (glassworks and bronze metallurgy), Arretium or
Arezzo (earthenware), Apulia, Calabria and the Po Valley (textiles). By the 2nd century AD Italian overseas trade ebbed,
the dynamism of the northern and western provinces being in part responsible for Italy’s decline. According to Strabo
there were more commercial entrepreneurs in Gades (Cádiz) than in any other Roman city with the only exception of
Patavium (Padua).
Owing to a well devised expansion policy, Rome will grow and become Antiquity’s most populated city with well over
ONE MILLION inhabitants. At the time of the first emperor Augustus, from 27 BCE onwards, estimates go as high as
c. 1,250,000 living in Rome.
Information on the Roman economy is mostly indirect and insufficient, making an overall picture quite difficult.
Archaeologists rely on airborne surveys (aerial archaeology) to measure economic activity. This work, now based on
state-of-the-art scanning, yields interesting data. For one, we know cities sprang up throughout the Empire in, for the
time, impressive numbers: 2,500 of which 400 in the Italian peninsula. Principal cities in the Province of Hispania:
Rome led a DENSE URBANISATION PROCESS.
Emerita Augusta (Mérida) Tarraco (Tarragona)
Colonia Caesar Augusta (Saragossa) Corduba (Cordoba)
Colonia Norbensis Caesarina (Cáceres) Barcino (Barcelona)
Asturica Augusta (Astorga) Hispalis (Seville)
ROMANISATION:
• Army: construction of forts, harbours, bridges and
roads. Use of quarries and brickworks.
• Arrival of Italian merchants and products to supply the
army and the natives: ultimately a stimulus for local
production and enterprise.
• The colonised territory develops its own economy and
the demand for Italian merchandise consequently
decreases.
Terra sigillata started off as distinctively Italian pottery. Under Augustus
it was produced in Gaul as well. Under Domitian it was exported from
Gaul to southern Baden (in Germany). Lastly it will be produced in
Germany itself.
https://www.rtve.es/television/20210128/ingenieria-romana-vuelve-2-nuevos-capitulos/2069341.shtml
plaustrum
Rome was responsible for a new social structure on the Iberian peninsula, which now belonged to the ROMAN
ECONOMIC SYSTEM both monetary and fiscal. Roman authorities had the monopoly on minting coins in precious
metals within the Empire. The economy of the IBERIAN PENINSULA rested on three basic legs:
MINING copper in Riotinto (Huelva)
gold in the N and NW (Las Médulas, León)
silver and lead from Jaén, Almería and New Carthage (Cartagena)
pitch
drugs and dyes
AGRICULTURAL OUTPUT cereal (wheat) horse breeding
Based on a system of rural villae olive oil esparto grass
or villas cultivated by peasants, wine wax and honey
settlers or serfs fruits and vegetables
wool (including manufactured woollen cloaks from the Baetica)
salted-fish products: such as the garum fish-sauce from Gades, mackerel from
New Carthage and muria (pickled tunny-fish in brine)
(Hispania imported manufactures, textiles, foodstuffs, metals, ceramic, marble, etcetera)
Rome’s social-juridical structure was progressively adopted by the Roman provinces and specifically in Hispania:
• Legal status: Roman citizen (cives) Latin citizen / socii or foederati (citizens of states associated with Rome) /
foreigner or peregrinus / freedman / serf or slave /// colonus or settler
• Family: pater familias / wife / children / clients, dependents and extended family
• Social hierarchy or rank: senators / knights or equites / decurions
On the one hand stood the representatives of Rome’s imperial oligarchy in Hispania (senators and knights or equites)
and the urban elites and powerful families who discharged duties as magistrates and high-ranking officials and on the
other the plebs or people (urban or agrarian), the peregrini or foreigners, the freedmen and the slaves. Slaves and
serfs were NOT free. Freedmen were former slaves who had been manumitted by their owners.
After Rome the most populated cities of the Empire were Alexandria (Egypt), Antioch (Syria) and Roman Carthage.
Their population averaged somewhere between 200,000 and half a million inhabitants.
The scores of POTTERY found in archaeological sites on the Italian peninsula prove that Rome’s per capita income
rose alongside the population count. Other indicators also underscore that the population’s increase went hand in
hand with higher living standards: the greater demand for FIREWOOD in Germania after its conquest; the
exploitation of COAL in the British Isles under Rome; and the total number of PUBLIC BUILDINGS erected in the
various Roman provinces. Today scholars no longer accept the notion that both the Greek and the Roman economies
stagnated for lack of technological innovation, which was caused in turn by the availability of slave labour stemming
from their military might and conquests. Archaeological finds prove that there were fields such as HYDRAULICS in
which Roman technology made headway. In fact Romans applied their mastery of hydraulics and iron casting of tools
to MINING.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_F2NMHxMYw
C. AD 300 an eastern Roman watermill was endowed with a system of
gears that activated two metal saws whose reciprocal thrusts were used to
cut marble blocks. The ability to transform a rotational movement into
reciprocal thrusts stands as proof that Greek and Roman engineers had
mastered the basics that would have enabled them to construct a STEAM
ENGINE. Hero of Alexandria built a steam-engine prototype, called the
AEOLIPILE, providing rotational action. Another one of Hero’s engines
used air from a closed chamber (condenser) heated by an altar fire to
displace water from a sealed vessel. The water was then collected and its
weight, pulling on a rope, opened temple doors. It would appear Greeks
and Romans were short only of abundant fuel (peat or coal) and of the
right machinery to make adjustable pistons and iron cylinders.
1928: a Roman waterwheel unearthed (Huelva)
 AMBIVALENT SOCIAL PERCEPTION OF TRADE
In theory at least, members of the Roman Senate were precluded from trade. Livy refers to the Lex Claudia (219 BCE)
that prevented senators and their children from owning a vessel whose cargo capacity was in excess of 300 amphorae
(or c. 7 tons). Livy did not hide that for him the proceeds of commerce were dishonourable for men of senatorial rank.
Yet other authors like Cicero (as mentioned before) make clear that the senatorial class partook of benefits derived
from trade. Cato recommended that landed estates be close to rivers, roads or harbours, obviously implying
surpluses could be best shipped or carried off, i.e. commercialised. Sources such as Terence help us grasp that social
prejudice was directed specifically to small-scale trade, which was seen as vulgar and demeaning, whilst large-scale
commerce was considered to be an appropriate investment for the wealthiest citizens. Part of the misgivings about
commerce had to do with the fact that it was seen as a risky activity, one that could easily backfire and put at risk the
riches of high-ranking families whose very social status depended on a minimum accepted standard of wealth.
Landownership was therefore seen as more stable and therefore as more appropriate for the Roman aristocracy.
Members of the equestrian order went into business (negotium) albeit the accepted social values for the upper-class
Roman privileged leisure (otium) and military pursuits. Trade booths and shops in markets were run by plebeians and
freedmen. The lion’s share of toil and hard labour fell on slaves, which were a significant section of the overall
population and who were themselves the object of trade.
As was the case with the Greeks, Roman merchants worshipped Hermes/Mercury as their god. On 14 May the
festivities known as MERCURALIA were held. In these merchants made offerings to Mercury asking for forgiveness so
that they and their belongings be rid of the guilt stemming from their swindling and cheating clients and suppliers.
ROMAN SOCIAL STRUCTURE
Social status was decided by ancestry, order or census, citizenship and honours (honores)
Patrician senatores estate: 400,000 to 1 million sestertii
equites 400,000 sestertii
Plebeians (5 orders)
Proles NON CITIZENS: peregrini or foreigners, freedmen, slaves
TRADE in the Roman world was left in the hands of:

• negotiatores –behaved as bankers insofar they lent money for an interest

–sold and bought wholesale
• argentarii –acted as agents in public or private auctions
–kept deposits from clients
–exchanged money
–cashed checks (prescriptiones)
–kept books of financial operations (by means of tabulae, which were legally binding)
note: the argentarii known as mensarii were public bankers
• mercatores –usually plebeians or freedmen
–carried on their activities in open-air markets, in shops, in booths lining the roads or near
military encampments https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4GLMY6unc
• hawkers, vendors, pedlars
MONTE TESTACCIO, ROME
The type of trade leaving the most significant
archaeological trace (in the shape of amphorae)
came from the Iberian peninsula: wine, olive oil
and garum. The Testaccio mountain in Rome is
actually an artificial mound made of amphora
shards… fragments upon fragments of no less
than 53 million amphorae accumulating for three
centuries. The standard (or capitoline) amphora
was kept in Rome.
http://ceipac.ub.edu/index_en.html
TOOLS FOR TRADE
The Romans used the abacus for calculations as well as a system of weights and measures and their own monetary
system http://www.the-romans.eu/diversen/Weights-and-measures.php

standard modius in
bronze (4th century AD)
with the seal of
imperial approval on it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btAXhgrApN0
 —It fell upon imperial authorities to patrol the
seas, to police the roads and to protect the
commercial routes. Such was the basis on which
the PAX rested and which proved indispensable
to the profit of private entrepreneurs.
—moles, quays, lighthouses, canals (e.g. joining
the Rhine and the North Sea or the Red Sea and
the Nile), inns, hydraulic infrastructure, etc., were
all financed at public expense. In the early Empire
MINING was almost the only exception to the
general rule of free enterprise.

‘… a general picture of the western and more

recently developed provinces of the Empire, which
fit into a whole, impressive in respect of both its size
and its achievements. Within an area extending from
the Scottish lowlands to the Euphrates, from the
Black Sea to the Atlas Mountains, a single economic
system was organised under one central authority.
PAX ROMANA: THE PEACE OF ROME From the setting up of the principate in 31 BCE the
Empire enjoyed almost unbroken peace for nearly a
quarter of a millennium. Freed from the threats of war and the burdens of military service, and protected by well-devised
frontiers and a standing army several hundred thousand strong, its population could devote itself to the activities of peace,
to agriculture, commerce, and industry.’
David L. Clarke (The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, II)
PROVINCES
OF THE
ROMAN
EMPIRE
In Morocco and in Hispania olive-oil processing plants from Roman times have been found. In Italy fish factories have
been documented. Romans were responsible for setting up an ECONOMY OF SCALE based on targeted
specialisation to ensure lower production costs. This would explain their success with manufactures and processed
products.

The COMMERCIAL role of the ROMAN ARMY was crucial. Soldiers and sailors curbed piracy in the Mediterranean
and banditry on land routes. Under this protective umbrella, merchants were emboldened to extend both the reach
and the bulk of their activities. They could rely on more or less uniform resources and advantages in most if not all
Mediterranean harbours. From these it was possible to follow land or land-and-sea routes in order to reach distant
places such as Mesopotamia or the Indus Valley, both areas of ancient civilisation in which the positive effect of
Roman trade was registered.

We have records of sizable economic growth lasting for more than THREE CENTURIES.

From c. AD 300 the population of Rome decreased. Demographic and economic figures spelled out decline. Rather
than invoking Rome’s supposed inability to foster major technological innovation, today historians stress that the roots
of Rome’s economic downslide must be seen in the catastrophic effects of the ANTONINE PLAGUE (AD 165-180). It
was carried by Roman troops returning from campaigns in the Middle East. In some areas up to 1/3 of the urban
population perished. As a result of such a loss of human life, resources dwindled and so did the ranks of the army
putting an end to the traditional security of the Empire’s borders on which the success of Roman trade depended. It
became necessary to turn to recruits from border zones with the consequent lowering of efficiency standards. All this
had a negative impact on the quality and quantity of trade and on the quality of life.

The inability to recoup back to the economic pulse prior to the plague weighed down the western half of the Roman
Empire.
MEDITERRANEAN ECONOMY OF SCALE
According to PLINY Gaul was the equal of HISPANIA when it came to its output of cereal, oil, wine, horses and metals whilst
Hispania was superior in esparto grass (used for ropes), vitreous rocks, and delicate dyes and in the keenness and
industriousness of its slaves and the toughness and ardour of its people. Yet Pliny failed to lay stress on the superiority of
SPANISH MINES: gold, silver, lead, tin, iron, copper, cinnabar, mercury, mineral dyes, marble, and salt.

Pliny and Strabo left detailed accounts of the techniques of extracting metals the Romans employed in Spain: surface
washing, shafts into mountains, underpinned tunnels, Archimedes’ screw for draining the flood water from lower levels,
Ctesibius’ pump, and various types of drainage wheels.

The mines of New Carthage produced 81/3 tons silver per annum. Imperial authority exploited mines directly by means of
procurators or indirectly by means of a company under contract. In the main, miners were free workers and not slaves.

SICILY and AFRICA were granaries for Rome: Egypt sent 5 million bushels yearly, Africa 10 and Sicily perhaps 2 million of
grain to Ostia. Sicily provided grain and livestock but its contribution to the supply of Rome was not vital in the early
Empire. It could boast an active local industry and retail trade. On top of grain, Africa supplied olive oil, wool and
manufactures.

Starting with Augustus, Rome’s costly provisioning —for which purpose private shippers were hired— became a priority for
all Roman emperors. Claudius built a new harbour at Ostia linked by canal to the Tiber and granted privileges to those who
undertook SHIPPING GRAIN TO THE CAPITAL OF THE EMPIRE.

Although Rome at its greatest was not insulated, outside contacts were never very significant. Rome traded with peoples
beyond its borders (limes) such as the Germanic tribes. Trade went on as well along the caravan routes that via Parthia
connected Rome with the Far East. Such long-distance trade was taxed heavily: 25% during the 1st century AD.
LONG-DISTANCE TRADE ROUTES. Rome, as stated before, traded with India and China.

INDIA. The historian Plutarch wrote about the existence of a man of Indian origin in Augustus’ household. The same
source noted that Augustus welcomed embassies from India while visiting Hispania (25 BCE) or on the island of
Samos (20 BCE).
There was a terrestrial trade route to India that passed through Bactra (Balkh, Afghanistan) and Antiochia Margiana
(Merv). Yet the maritime route was preferable. A Greek sea captain named Hippalus discovered the Monsoon winds
before AD 14, during Augustus’ reign. This discovery made it possible for someone setting sail from Puteoli (Pozzuoli)
to reach the Malabar coast (with Berenice and Mios Hormos as principal port of call) in 16 weeks and to complete the
return trip in under a year’s time.

Trade across the Indian ocean flourished on the 1st and 2nd centuries at the
height of Rome’s expansion and prosperity.

Tamils were Rome’s commercial partners. Greek and Roman textual sources re-
cord such contacts. Romans paid in gold and silver. Indeed, large amounts of
Roman coins have been found in southern India. Roman manufactures have
been located in Indian harbours like Arikamedi.

Imports from India: • spices (pepper, cardamom, clove, cinnamon)

• sandalwood
• gems (pearls, rubies, diamonds, emeralds)
• ivory

gold medal of Emperor Claudius (r. AD 50-61) found in India

 LONG-DISTANCE TRADE ROUTES: https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/silk
CHINA. /hd_silk.htm

Archaeological finds suggest there was

Roman commerce with SE Asia. In the 2nd
century AD Greeks sailed to Ceylon and
Sumatra and reached the Mekong Delta.
Chinese documents mention Greek
envoys of ‘An-Tun’ (Marcus Aurelius)
visiting the court of Emperor Huan-Ti (of
the Han dynasty) at Loyang in AD 166 and
presenting tributes to him. Roman
medallions from the Antonine period have
been found in Vietnam. It is likely the
Greeks who arrived in north Vietnam and
China were merchants rather than
diplomats given that they are not
mentioned by Roman sources. All in all,
only 16 Roman coins from the reign of
Tiberius to that of Aurelian (1st to 3rd
centuries AD) have been found so far. This
would indicate that the Romans acquired
Chinese silk through India and not directly
from China.
 Rome’s economy had WEAKNESSES:
—the divide between the comfortable lifestyle of the townsman (esp. the urban elites) and the hard life of peasants
—few devices (such as the invention of valved bellows in the 4th century to make complete smelting possible) went beyond what
was already available in Hellenistic Egypt (gear, screw, rotary mill, water-mill, glass-blowing, use of concrete in building, hollow
bronze casting)
—transport by land remained cumbersome, slow and expensive
—Romans did not use the horse-collar
—sea transport was cheaper but slow and most ships were of low tonnage and there was little winter navigation
CRISIS, REGRESSION AND INFLATION IN THE 3rd CENTURY AD
The economic prosperity of the early Empire was attained with minimum governmental interference although taxes were imposed
on sales and on commerce.
Conditions of uncertainty tended to discourage trade in distant commodities and had indeed the opposite effect of urging towards
local production and self-sufficiency at a time when risks became increasingly personal and interest rates consequently and
proportionally higher.
A by-product of the PAX ROMANA of the 1st and 2nd centuries AD was that in the 3rd and 4th centuries fewer slaves were available
since war and piracy continued to be the chief sources of slaves. By the time of Constantine (4th century AD) traders were granted
exemptions from public duties in order for them to improve their skill. More and more the Italian peninsula became parasitical upon
the rest of the Empire. From the middle of the 3rd century onwards the existing large inter-provincial trading blocks fell yet further
apart: * Spain–Gaul–Germany–(and partly) Britain * African provinces from Mauritania to Cyrenaica
* Italy–Sicily–Corsica–Sardinia * Rhaetia–Noricum–Danube provinces of Pannonia and Dacia
The latest Spanish amphorae from Rome’s Monte Testaccio date from AD 257: a clear symptom of the GENERAL economic
regression of the 3rd century. Starting in AD 238 rapid inflation can be detected spurred by the realisation that the silver content of
the denarius had been reduced. The tendency to an increasingly LOCALISED economy was reinforced. Debasing the currency was
the response of a beleaguered Roman administration having to face the costs of the army and the state bureaucracy. Albeit with
little success, in 237 AD Diocletian decreed maximum prices for scores of products. The Emperor was attempting to put a stop to
galloping inflation in the vicinity of the imperial court or the imperial armies. The 3rd century saw the evolution of the Roman Empire
to state-controlled private enterprise. As a result, a considerable body of population chose to situate itself outside the range of
money economy for the bulk of its needs.
With the collapse of the
imperial state, large sections of
the economy that depended
on it disappeared. The residue
(small artisans and traders in
the towns, local markets,
itinerant craftsmen, the villages
around the manor or the
monastery and, for the rich, an
irregular trade in luxuries from
all parts of the Mediterranean)
was left as the economic
foundation for the new states
of medieval Europe.
Philip Kay
Rome’s Economic Revolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1uvYNFK7pA