History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedRoman Provinces Economy

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Makinus View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 01-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Makinus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Roman Provinces Economy
    Posted: 01-May-2006 at 17:10
Anyone know a site where i can find information of each Roman Province economy?

I basically want to find what are the main sources of riches of each province (gold mines, quarry, copper, etc.) and their economic importance....

Basically i would want to know wich provinces were the richest, and wich are the poorest...

thanks

Back to Top
Imperator Invictus View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Administrator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Status: Offline
Points: 3204
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Imperator Invictus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-May-2006 at 23:03
I've never seen a site with all the data listed in a compilation, but if there's a specific province you need data on, I might be able to find it.

I'm going to guess that Syria and Egypt were the richest provinces. For the poorest, it's difficult to say because there were many that weren't in economically rich areas.
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar
Lord of Hut River Province Principality

Joined: 01-May-2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 5713
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-May-2006 at 08:16
Egypt was probably the most economically valuable to the Romans overall. The least economical were easily the ones which give the smallest yield in wealth for what it cost to defend them: simple investment analysis. You would probably be looking at Britannia in such an instance.

Edited by Constantine XI
It is not the challenges a people face which define who they are, but rather the way in which they respond to those challenges.

Back to Top
Heraclius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 28-Jun-2005
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 1233
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Heraclius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-May-2006 at 11:51

Originally posted by Constantine XI Constantine XI wrote:

Egypt was probably the most economically valuable to the Romans overall. The least economical were easily the ones which give the smallest yield in wealth for what it cost to defend them: simple investment analysis. You would probably be looking at Britannia in such an instance.

 Britannia was a weird one, a prosperous part of the empire, just unfortunate to also be one of the most vulnerable, hence the unusually large concentration of Roman forces, a standard of 3 legions as a garrison.

 Makes you wonder why the Romans remained in Britain for aslong as they did, considering the enormous cost of maintaining their authority and the repeated revolts by various governors of Britannia using the island as a base. The Romans had similar problems with Dacia later on, wealthy but vulnerable.

A tomb now suffices him for whom the world was not enough.
Back to Top
bagman101 View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 06-May-2006
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bagman101 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-May-2006 at 00:29
Tenney Frank - An Economic Survery of Ancient Rome
Back to Top
J.Caesar View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote J.Caesar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2006 at 00:06
The most valued of commodity to Rome was wine. It had a most incredible alleal to them that is hard for us to undersatnd today. Wine was everything to them. They did not want a territory that could not produce it. Sicly,North Africa had great wealth because of their wine trade with Rome.
Back to Top
Belisarius View Drop Down
Emperor
Emperor
Avatar

Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Location: Philippines
Status: Offline
Points: 1296
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-May-2006 at 13:07
Just a sidenote here...

Were the Romans mining tin in Britain during their stay there and what did they use it for?

Also, considering that Anatolia was by far the most populous part of the empire, what did the Romans use the region for?
"It is easier to talk than to hold one's tongue."
Back to Top
edgewaters View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 13-Mar-2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote edgewaters Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01-Jun-2006 at 23:32

Originally posted by Belisarius Belisarius wrote:

Just a sidenote here...

Were the Romans mining tin in Britain during their stay there and what did they use it for?

Also, considering that Anatolia was by far the most populous part of the empire, what did the Romans use the region for?


    

Yes, but tin was less important in Roman Britain than it had once been. However, Britain had plenty of other resources - there was gold, iron, lead, silver, marble, wool, and other various goods (eg hunting dogs) to be found in Britain. The Wealden ironworking zone was very important to the Empire:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealden_iron_industry

Britain was also a market with a large demand for Roman exports like wine, pottery, fruit, glassware, etc. An important commercial factor here is the collapse of Carthage, which deprived the Meditteranean cultures of British resources; trade with Britain mostly collapsed and what remained took the form of a trade in arms and other goods to the Belgae and the Gauls. It was also a place of refuge and support for Gallic and Belgic enemies of Rome. As a final reason for the invasion, a kingdom in southern Britain, centered in the city of Camulodunum, was consolidating power, annexing the other tribes and regions and emerging as a power in a good geographical position to cause problems for Roman provinces - and some of the tribes the Catuvellauni were annexing appealed to Rome for assistance. All of these factors combined to make invasion seem not just attractive, but absolutely necessary.
Back to Top
Ikki View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Guanarteme

Joined: 31-Dec-2004
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 1358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ikki Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02-Jun-2006 at 12:24
Hi,

many provinces have a section for the economy

http://www.unrv.com/provinces/provincetable.php

a general view for the empire

http://www.unrv.com/economy.php

There are many beatifouls economy maps of the RE in enciclopedies.

Basically the East was the industrious and commercial side and the West provide hard goods. But this is grossly certain, in fact the West had a strong industrial sector (specially Gallia) and the east a very rich agriculture (for example Egypt).
If you ask me directly about the most richest and the poorest, i say Asia first (better than the own Italy, and i'm talking about only of Asia's province, not Anatolia), and then Cyrenaica. The first because was the more populated, had 700 cities, in comparasion with Italy that had 500 (generally, the stimations of population put the dates of Anatolia between 11 and 15 millions, and Italy in the 7), a very richest agriculture, the mining of marbles, the most powerful industrial sector based on the textiles and ceramic, a prosperous trade...

Contrary Cyrenaica, the trade routes didn't cross the territory (to Leptis Magna and Alexandria), the agriculture was very limited and the fishing the same, they hadn't mining, didn't make goods and had very few population. Becareful, Mauretania Tingitana wasn't very far.

Edit: I see that Cyrenaica had a very rich agriculture, so, forget it. Tingitana the poorest?





Edited by Ikki - 02-Jun-2006 at 14:11
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.