Читать книгу Money in History - Karl Walker - Страница 6

THE MONEY BASED ECONOMY OF THE ROMANS

The Romans took over the metal money from the Greeks. Originally, cattle were their means of exchange. When they minted the first bronze coins in 600 B.C. they still had to depict cattle in order to demonstrate the meaning of the money. Even the name of the previous cattle-money stayed in use for the new mean of exchange and stuck: Pecus = pecunia.

Rome was an interested student in regards to money economy, division of labor and trade. Rome learned from the Greeks, from the Phoenicians and from Carthage. However, the mix of people that settled along the coasts of the Italian peninsula was unruly and unpredictable. So the Romans became a war people. They subjugated the defeated tribes, city-states of the Etruscans and finally also the Greek coastal cities in Southern Italy. But even at the time when the Roman rule was secured over lower Italy, and when it started the final battle with Carthage, it was still a peasant people in the beginning with copper currency and natural economic supply for the state. It was not yet recognizable that here would form a culture that would rule the world.

When Rome’s development afterwards made nearly a kind of greenhouse progress, this was mainly based on the fact that war brings faster the magic power of money into the country than peaceful trade. Already after conquering Tarentum, Rome could mint silver coins from the booty in the year 269 B.C.; and 62 years later the first Roman Gold coins followed already. In the years 202–190 B.C. the peace agreements with Carthage, Syria and Macedon bring some 150,000,000 Gold Marks (3,000,000,000 US Dollar as of 2012, George Reiff) as a tribute of war to Rome. As the money of antiquity had a far higher buying power, this is the equivalent of the 4 billion Gold Marks (those would be 80 billion US Dollars as of 2012, George Reiff) that France had to pay to Germany after the war of 1870/71! The magnificent stream of precious money to Rome permitted a fast development of the money-based economy.

Till minting the silver money, the As that resulted from a weight unit was the most common coin. With introduction of the silver money it all gravitated towards the Denarius. The Roman Denarius was a relatively heavy silver coin: from 370 grams (one Roman pound) of Silver they would mint 84 Denarii. The Denar was denominated into 4 Sestertii, which in turn consisted of 4 As each. The subdivision of the As resulted in 12 Unciae = ounces. We can see that the Romans like the Greeks had the number 12 with her subdivision into halves and quarters and also its multiples = 84 Denarii made from 370 gram of silver, which still played an important role. The most important small coin was the Sestertius and with this coin the Romans mostly calculated on markets and in the households while larger merchants calculated with the denarius and the talent. Later, when Rome could already mint gold coins, the aureus coin had a value of 25 Denarii or 100 Sestertii and were made from 1/40 pound of gold (9.25 gram). This gold coin was in later times debased and so Emperor Constantine replaced it in the year 313 A.D. with the solidus coin.

As Roman coins were valid in the whole empire and bore the image of Roman emperors who were in pagan and even later in Christian times considered divine; they were religious nuisance in the province of Judaea. It is reported through Bishop Hippolytus of Portus about the Essenes who were one of the monastic Qumran communities according to current religious science that they were not allowed to carry any money with them. As there are various reasons to justify the hypothesis that Jesus of Nazareth lived or prepared through the community of the Essenes before starting his messianic mission, we can see the Biblical scene of the Tribute Money in a new light livid and clear.

The Pharisees had decided to trap the uncomfortable Nazarene; for this purpose they sent out their creatures together with some people of the Roman representative Herod and let him ask: Master, we know that you do not lie and that you teach the way of the Lord in honesty and that you do not ask for anybody because you do not look at the face of the people. Tell us now what you think: is it permitted to pay the emperor his taxes or not? But Jesus saw their evilness and answered: why do you try me you hypocrites? Show me the course coin. And they brought him one Denarius. And he told them: Whose picture is this and whose inscription? And they answered: the Emperor’s. And he spoke to them: therefore, give the Emperor what is his, and give God what is God’s (Matthew 22. 15–22).

Christ’s lifetime fell into the reign of Augustus and his successor Tiberius. The described event is accepted within religious science as historically genuine. It shows us that there was obviously a dispute between strongly religious Jews on one hand and the opportunists on the other hand who became tame in the face of the real power whether or not the use of Roman money was still in line with the law of the fathers and of God. Jesus of Nazareth has not carried money with the picture of the idol in accordance with the monastic rules of the Essenes; he asked for it to be presented when the insidious question was asked (see also Robert Eisler: “Das Geld”, page 152).

It is reported by history about Caligula who became emperor a few years after Christ’s Death on the Cross and who became murderous in his caesarian megalomania, that he had a sculpture of his person carried to Palestine by his troops for veneration purposes through the subjugated people. The Jewish population resisted passively and blocked the way with thousands of people and denied the Emperor the veneration as god. It is obvious that the coins of Caligula must have been a nuisance for the Jews as well. This, however, had no influence on the large economic significance of Roman Money Economy.

The Roman Gold-Solidus and the Denarius as silver coin remained to the times of the migration of the peoples and the service that could be rendered to the development of culture and economy through an orderly monetary system cannot be valued high enough in Roman History. Skilled hands for various trades of the division of labor were also found on the slave markets that feed their blossom also from the downfall of Greece. Now there were money and skilled hands and the organizational skill of the Romans let form cities and magnificent buildings; streets and bridges like they were only built again in the 19th century, palaces, theaters and baths were built as much as aqueducts that even as ruins still witness their former splendor.

Unlike the Greeks and their ways of leading wars, the Romans treated the subjugated people with a certainly wise moderation and so they were also able to keep the conquered. Rome was once only half the size like Attica and it contained about 1000 square kilometers land. At the beginning of the Christian era, however, did Rome rule over 54 million people and 3.3 million square kilometers land and was with this 6 times bigger than the German Empire before WW I. The capital of this gigantic empire could employ in their service all goods of a worldwide division of labor. There was amber from the north, Indian pearls and precious stones, Arabic purple and incense, Spanish wool, Egyptian linen, Greek vines, African oil, Chinese silk, British oysters, furs from the Don region etc. And as though it is true that Rome did not get large without wars, so did the Imperial time bring the longest peace to the Roman Empire that was ever seen in the world. In his work “Cultures, People and States from the Beginning till now” the author Hugo Rachel indicates this noteworthy fact and he writes:

“From 31 B.C. till 235 A.D. the countries around the Mediterranean remained nearly untouched from war and insurgency; fights took place at the borders and only the crises of succession of the throne in 68/69 A.D. and the insurgencies in Gallia and Judaea interrupted the most happy time of mankind. Unlike the savagery of the late republican times, there was despite all shortcomings a just, humane regime that was considerate regarding commonwealth of the whole empire. The material culture was blossoming extraordinarily and increased in expanse. A vivid and secure traffic, a general intellectual and commercial exchange spanned the whole Roman world; coins, measures and weights and even time keeping (newly ordered through Cesar) and law were regulated unanimously.”

It is self-evident that during these times everything could develop what was possible back then from division of labor, exchange of services and world trade. But nothing of all those things that witness Rome’s magnificence could form without the miraculous power of money. Nonetheless it would be a deception if we wanted to believe that Rome used its monetary economy consciously and with wisdom for the commonwealth of the state and that it had acted properly at all times. But given our own memories from modern times, we are not surprised that already Rome in need of its wars took refuge in the form of inflation policy that was possible back then: the debasement of the coinage. Already during the Punic Wars was the weight of the Silver denarius diminished in order to mint more denarii. The mercenary armies demanded money as salary and the Romans did emergency coinage from the gold coins from the treasure of the Temple of Jupiter. The treasure they replaced by gilded lead because regarding that point they had the opinion that in religious things appearance is sufficient – a view that has not disappeared fully during other times and other religions.

Around 91 B.C. the tribune Livius Drusus brought through a decree in the senate according to which one out of 8 coins was supposed to be filled with inferior copper from the inside and plated with silver from the outside. During those times the value of money was so uncertain that – as Cicero wrote it – nobody could be sure what he owned. Some years later Marius Gratidian wanted to restore healthy conditions and outlaw attempted payments with bad coinage. For this he was initially hailed and afterwards upon command of Sulla executed. The debasement was continued. Of course there were also times when conquests brought new supplies of precious metals into the country and this brought improvement of the coinage. Conquest of the rich Syrian trade city Palmyra, located between Damascus and the middle Euphrates river brought the Romans immense treasures. Even nowadays the columns of the gigantic ruins, temples of Baal, colonnades, theatres witness the former greatness of this city that was destroyed by her conquerors, as Palmyra was the hub of a trade state that during its blossom expanded till far into Egypt and Asia Minor.

Insofar as the conquered provinces delivered their stocks of precious metal to wanton Rome and by the need in the country itself took refuge to debasement, conditions followed in antiquity that may be very familiar for us. Egypt was Roman Province during the time of soldier Emperor Diocletian (284–305 A.D.). Diocletian aimed at a magnificent new structuring of this gigantic empire. Much has been reached by his unbendable will. Only the money did not bend – but about that we could only smile if we had not acted in the same way like this Roman Emperor, who wanted to cure the decay of the monetary system resulting from money multiplication and bad copper coins, by introducing price caps and death penalty. While in Rome a bushel (29.18 liters) barley cost only 100 denarii and a pound of meat between 8–10 denarii, in the provinces devaluation of money was far more progressed. Professor Eisler compiled from Egyptian Papyri an interesting overview: “in the year 255 A.D. a bushel of wheat of 29.18 liters cost 16 drachmae but 314 A.D. it cost already 10,0000 drachmae. A house that cost 2000 drachmae in 267 A.D., could yield a loan of 3840,000,000 drachmae just 40 years later. 3 kilogram of meat cost 8000 drachma back then, a game drumstick 50,000 drachma, 4 chickens 30,000 drachma and half a liter of wine between 12,000–26,000 drachma. The increase of salaries and wages performed accordingly. In the year 304 A.D. a street worker or a brick shipper would receive 400–500 Drachmae daily. A scribe would receive free food and 3000 drachmae and a groom for horses would receive 3500 Drachmae, a groom for mules 6000 drachmae and a teacher 6000 drachmae as well” (see Robert Eisler: “Das Geld”, page 173).

He, who does not recognize his wealth during the lucky days, will learn to recognize it when it is lost.

Like at one time waste, luxury, and laziness, introduced decay to Athens, they did so in Rome too. Here as well the pursuit for wealth developed in the same way. Land became sellable and loans could be taken out on it; the pursuit of money and the inexperience in dealing with this thing resulted in debt and horrendous interests resulted in fast decay of the peasantry, leading to peony, land flight and overcrowding of the cities. As slaves and freeman did workmanship and trade, the Roman despise the original work. His civilization was based on the principle of division of labor but he himself did not follow this principle. And so the city was crowded with unemployed destitute Roman citizens whom – like in Greece – had first to be given bread and then bread and games.

This permanent consumption without effort, this immoderate need for magnificence and luxury of the rich layers of society caused here also an outflow of Gold and Silver to foreign lands from whom the coveted produce came on ships and trade routes. Is it not so that this unheard expenditure of Roman circus games had an economic other side? Sulla let rage a hundred lions in the arena; Pompey increased the show up to 500 lions and unnumbered other animals from all zones within reach. In the year 65 B.C. Cesar let fight over 600 gladiators in silver armor and he hosted the Roman people on 22,000 tables magnificently and presented them with grain and money gifts as preparation to his last step towards unchecked power.

The logic of the calculation of the money is merciless, whether one understands it or not. Rome was certainly able to mobilize the stocks of precious metals of the provinces – in the silver mines of Spain were temporarily over 40,000 people at work and in similar size gold was mined in Dacia – however, the outflow was still bigger. The fall of Rome was as good as a done deal when together with the disappearance of money the Spanish silver mines were also exhausted. Now even draconic measures against the export of precious metals did not help anymore; and even the debasement of coins – up to 95% filling with copper in silver coins – could not sustain the necessary money circulation anymore. The splendor of the Roman Empire was based on a vastly extended money based economy and division of labor and perished now with the decay of this foundation.

Regarding buying power of Roman money: one got around the time of the birth of Christ for one denarius food and room in an inn for 16 days. Around 20 A.D. the entry for one of the splendid Roman baths costs for women one As and for men only 3 Unciae (0.25 As), see Menzner-Flocken: “Kaufkraft und Zeitgeschehen”, Arbogast Publishers, Otterbarch 1958.