Rome: Did Romans Meet The Common Good

The economy of Rome was failing because trade and business had begun to fade. As stated in document 1 “Commerce had largely disappeared owing to the lack of customers, to piracy on the seas, and to insecurity of the roads on land.” Due to the lack of customers and the dangers of the road and the sea, there

Rome’s dominance of the Mediterranean lead to efficient and highly beneficial trade amongst Romans and surrounding countries. Finally, the Romans had one designated money system in which their entire empire used. The Roman coin represents intelligence, organization, unity, and the importance trade obtained in the Roman empire. The Romans traded with coins and all came together under one

The Roman empire was based on slavery: slavery on a massive scale. Therefore The success and spoils of Roman wars meant that slaves were everywhere putting regular Roman citizens out of work. This solution was not ideal but no rich Romans (patricians) seemed willing to compromise and give up their slaves. Attempts were made to base taxes on the numbers of slaves owned but the rich simply freed their slaves to avoid taxation and then added on still to the numbers of unemployed.

The people would suffer more and more want, and yet the amount of territory and goods controlled and imported by Rome from its provinces was vast and varied, from fine cloth to precious metals, wild animals to cereals. As well, Rome developed a sophisticated coinage system to further facilitate buying and selling, though most of that wealth, too, remained in the hands of the same elite, who built and took advantage of the extensive Roman roads, sea routes, and the military to keep their own profit flowing. Ultimately, Rome's economy was a complex beast with little thought of sustainability. Rather, territories were conquered by the huge Roman army, and profit from taxes and new access to goods soon resulted, giving the corrupt and greedy the confidence that resources would be unlimited. Sustainability nor employment opportunities were not a consideration, and the common people could do nothing but live with it and tell themselves that it was traditional and good for Rome while watching the free shows that the rich paid for to keep them pliable and

All these minerals allowed eventually for Rome to strengthen its powers as a powerful force in the ancient world. In addition to all of that Rome developed new trade routes with the capturing of Gaul. It was located between the Mediterranean sea and near the more northern part of Europe. This had made it an important place for trade. It was so important because the Mediterranean was the main spot where all trade would flow through.

This met the common good, because all the people of Rome could get clean after a hard day in the fields. The Romans also provided public services, because they had the aqueducts to deliver water from reservoirs, to the public baths, public fountains, and private villas. When the Romans provided public services, I believe that they met the common good, so I would give this an easy A. I believe that the Romans met the common good, when preparing a common defense. The Romans developed an army during the republic, and the army was used in times of trouble. Later, a permanent one was made.

A decrease of working farmers forced government subsidization, which then caused a big blow to the Roman economy. The last reason for the ruination of the economic side of the Empire was the costs of military funding and the effects of trading. The spread of pacifistic beliefs throughout the Empire led to a decrease in the amount of willing legionnaires, pressuring the government to allow barbarian tribes to work for their military. As the two sides of the Empire drifted apart, they started to fight over valuable resources and made enemies with each other. The failing economy of the Roman Empire eventually grew to be the most significant cause of its monumental disintegration.

For example, if an invasion was occurring in Egypt. But the bulk of their armies were stationed in the city of Rome the general could load them into ships and send them by sea which is much faster than traveling by foot which any land-locked countries like Mongolia would have to do. Fully surrounding the Meditteranean was also very useful in creating trade routes between major cities throughout the empire. Eventually, the empire grew so big that it had to be split in two, the Western Roman Empire being controlled by Rome, and the Eastern by Constantinople.

It seems that the fall of the Roman Republic was not a singular event that occurred instantaneously, but rather a long process that saw the increasing use of methods outside of Republican institutions to settle conflicts between members of the aristocracy over political power. Even as the Roman government transitioned form Kingdom to Republic and then to Empire, the competition between aristocratic families remained a relative constant in across the centuries. So too has the desire to mythologize the past. The romans attributed both the fall of the Kingdom of Rome and the fall of the Roman Republic to moral rot, while a more reasonable assessment might place the blame on a dissatisfied and competitive elite class and an inefficient and unresponsive governmental system that was unwilling or unable to address their concerns. In much the same way, modern observers of the Roman Republic have tended to mythologize the fall of the Republic in the service of creating a moral narrative about the unconscionable tyranny of Cesar and the righteousness of the Senate, or whatever alternative narrative is befitting of the historical moment and audience.

First, the amount of casualties in numerous wars, such as the Punic Wars in which 300,000 were estimated to have died, negatively impacted the number of Roman farmers. The farmers were known as the backbone of Rome at the time. Land reforms called latifundias started developing. These estates would buy out small farms and turn the free workers into slaves. These reforms became really popular because they

In Ancient Rome, slavery was an integral part of the Roman society and economy. Slaves were either conquered or purchased, and their various skills and labors greatly contributed to Rome’s success. Romans arguably invested so much energy into slave labor that they failed to nurture innovation. Slaves made up roughly 10- 15% of the Roman population.

Democracy in Ancient Rome Ancient Rome is often portrayed as a highly democratic society for the ancient world. After all, the United States’ government is modeled after some parts of the Roman’s structure of government. But,was Rome as democratic as is is commonly thought to be? Contrary to what people may think Rome’s democracy wasn't exactly so democratic for all of its citizens. One example of Rome’s confusing concept of democracy can be found in The Histories, which was written by the Greek historian Polybius in 119 BCE.

to 180 A.D., Rome experienced a period of peace and prosperity. During this period the urban population grew significantly, and began stretching into areas previously occupied by rural inhabitants. This expansion led to increased consumption of natural resources predominately in the areas of agriculture, water, and construction materials. Emperor Augustus attempted to address urban expansion by implementing an annual grain dole by which commoners received free grain. Although this system prevented immediate famine, it led to the depletion of grain stores which played a significant factor in the near collapse of Rome in the 3rd century.

I don’t think Rome would have reached the level of success she did without their aid, the provinces enriched her with wealth. art, culture and trade. It seems to me that the Roman empire operated like an international trade organisation, however, with much easier access because she governed all of the provinces. References Ancient Roman Economy.

The economy of Ancient Rome was essentially a market based competitive economy; capitalistic in nature (Milani, G, n.d.). Their economy was fundamentally defined by the production and distribution of foodstuffs and agriculture was the main occupation of the majority of the population. Farmers would donate their surplus crops to the government instead of paying monetary tax. This system allowed republican and imperial rulers to gain popularity of the masses through free grain distribution.