Building walls

You might remember a previous blog about how the Roman finance world used military expansionism to feed its liquidity and manage currency values. Similar imperial expansions seen since the 1600s - and into the 1940s - were not too distant from this model either. But what happened when the Roman legions stopped marching towards the horizon? Did the Roman economy collapse as it ate out the resources trapped within its borders? The short answer is - yes, eventually, but it took two hundred years, and the initial end to expansionism was better planned than a knee jerk populist decision of wanting to bring the legions home.

For a long time we've looked at Hadrian as the wall builder - and perhaps a little defeatist in attitude when compared to the conquests of Dacia and Arabia by his predecessor and second cousin, Trajan. What we've got to remember is that both of them were businessmen at heart - from the same Spanish olive oil family. Now in those days, olive oil was an industrial product, and it would be best to compare these two Spaniards to today's Texan oil families - olive oil plantations weren't about salad condiments, they kept the lights on at night. The fact, is Trajan and Hadrian both understood money, and they both understood the need to make it. Trajan followed the well trodden path of keeping the state in cash by acquiring more resources. But the more conservative Hadrian decided to try something different. He built walls.

Now, we really have the wrong perspective of these walls. We take the medieval view that a wall is to protect you and to keep ideologically opposed armies out of your town. But this wasn't really the case in Hadrian's time. By the second century AD, most Roman cities had no walls, or had extended far beyond those built in the early Republic four or five hundred years prior. Romans didn't have such a defensive attitude, simply because they understood no one beyond the border lands had the capacity to threaten more than banditry on the empire's edges. Hadrian's most famous wall, his namesake in Northern England, was ostensibly to keep the woad painted Picts out the towns and farms of Roman Britain, but lets take a more realistic view...what was the actual threat the northern tribes posed? At this time Roman Britain had a population of six million. The Picts, with far less arable land, and living in isolated pockets could not have numbered more than a few hundred thousand. There's no doubt they had the capacity for border raids, but the Roman legions also had the capacity to make sure there wasn't a Pictish community within a week's ride of the Roman territories. So why build an 80-mile wall (at enormous cost) to stop a few northern bandits?

Money. Remember, Hadrian was an oil man, he wasn't sitting in his Tivoli Gardens sucking his thumb worried the world was about to end. What that British wall meant, just like a similar structure across southern Germany between the headwaters of the Rhine and the Danube, was that he could make money by just sitting in his garden. With those walls in place, all those commodities (including Roman coinage) that had previously been able to cross the Roman borders freely, could now be taxed and monitored. Free trade, per se, was at an end. Hadrian could now impose tariffs and restrictions on imports and exports that land traders had been able to avoid. Suddenly the mule caravans were put on the same taxation footing as seaborne traders who had been taxed since time and immemorial. There was no more smuggling through Scottish ports from Ireland or Scandinavia. Just as there could be none through central Europe. In one fell swoop, Hadrian was able to control international trade and know about every last coin or commodity leaving or entering the Roman economy.

So I guess the next question is, which worked better, Trajan's free trade expansionism or Hadrian's tariffs? That sounds like another blog.

Find out if Calvus ever had a tax audit         

A touch of glass

Hand mirrors are one of those things often found in Roman era cemeteries...women were frequently buried with them. And more than most household items they can track the technological progressions of the classical era. For the best part of two thousand years bronze hand mirrors were the epitome of reflection, from the Egyptians through to the late Roman Republic in the first century BC. It was only in this later period that silver mirrors overtook bronze in the quality of reflection and the 'silvered' image became popular. However, as Pliny writes in the first century AD (100 years later), the 'modern' mirror was invented during his time, with results never seen before...glass with gold backing. For the first time the Roman world could see themselves as we see the world...a perfect reflection.

Find out if Calvus ever had a good look at himself

A little perspective

Most of us probably think last year is ancient history let alone what happened two thousand years ago. Geez, most of us think of the Romans barely being out of caves and eating boiled gruel for breakfast, lunch and tea. The Romans were a blip way back when, right? The Egyptians had just built the pyramids and the Sumerians had just invented writing. Well, the Romans were around for a while - they were a global super power for 800 years, twice as long as the British Empire and seven centuries ahead of where the United States is now, but they were far from being the first kids on the block. Civilisation was no more new to them than it is to us.

So let's try things from their perspective...what was ancient history for a Roman? Let's pick an easy date - 1AD. Rome's first emperor, Augustus, is 64 years old, Jesus Christ is seven.

By this time the city of Damascus has been around for 7000-years. The Pyramids of Giza are 2500 years old and getting a bit shabby, the volcanic destruction of Thera - and the Minoans - happened 1629 years ago and Tutankhamun has been dead for 1324 years.

The fall of Troy was 1185 years ago and Homer's epic poems of the event are 800 years old. Rome and Carthage were both founded more than 700 years ago. Western Democracy is 509 years old, the Battle of Thermopylae (the three hundred Spartans) happened 481 years ago, Alexander the Great has been dead for 324 years and Carthage (Rome's only real competitor) has been wiped from the face of the earth for 147-years.

More recently - Gaul was crushed 52 years ago, Julius Caesar has been dead for 45 years, while Anthony and Cleopatra both committed suicide 31 years ago...and ever since things have been pretty calm. In fact 1AD is a bit like now, but hey, it's all ancient history.

Find out what Calvus thought of ancient history

Staying healthy

Here's a quote for the day...

"Doctors learn by exposing us to risks and conduct experiments at the expense of our lives. Only a doctor can kill with impunity...Indeed the blame is transferred to the deceased, who is criticised for want of moderation."

Some highly paid lawyer in a recent malpractice suit? Nope...Pliny, 78AD. I guess the medical profession has had its detractors for a while.

Find out if Calvus ever went to the doctor

Polishing the silver

Rome's constant craving for silver meant tributes imposed on defeated kingdoms and countries were usually paid in silver rather than gold. When Hannibal's Punic forces were overwhelmed in October 202BC, Rome imposed a war reparations tax on Carthage of 800,000lbs of silver spread over fifty years...gold was excluded from the deal. It was all about currency...that silver was worth the equivalent of $5.6-trillion to the Roman treasury and gold would not be used as coinage for another century.

Find out if Calvus knew anything about Carthage

Making money

The production of silver was not without its challenges. Pliny describes all silver smelting using the ancient process of cupellation (used since the early Bronze Age) where lead ore containing silver - usually Galena - was smelted at temperatures in excess of 900 degrees Celsius to oxidise the lead and retrieve the pure silver metal. Using this process the Romans were able to produce silver from low grade ores containing as little as 0.01 percent of the precious metal and the same techniques continue to be used for modern processing. However all that oxidising metal brought with it the same issues of pollution lead smelting has today. Hundred of tonnes of charcoal would have been needed to supply the mines each week - much of Spain's and Britain's forests went into the furnaces, and the fumes produced from the cupels (the smelting vessels) was described by Pliny as being "harmful to all animals, but especially dogs" - although I imagine the slaves working the smelter didn't fair too well either. In fact, as far as the bounds of slavery went in the Roman world, being sent to the silver mines was considered the worst possible scenario...and was often in lieu of a death sentence. Needless to say, when it came to making money in those days, there was always someone who had to do it the hard way.  

Find out if Calvus ever made any money

Only second place?

It might be surprising to hear, but silver was far more important to Rome than gold...although, as today, its value was far lower. Silver set the standard for the finance trade and was pressed into the Denarius (the Roman equivalent of the $100 note in the late Republic) for several centuries. Because of its importance to the value of the Roman currency, silver - and the lead it was mined with - were state controlled by the First Century AD; over production would have decreased the value of the Denarius while under production would have driven inflation...concepts the Roman Treasury was just as aware of as today's modern Treasury officials. So the mining of silver (and finding new mines) was particularly important to the Roman Empire. Much of this mining was focused in Spain where some shafts produced over 300lb (around $2.1-million worth) per day...however as the Empire expanded, considerable production was shifted to Britain. It is quite possible the underlying reason Claudius committed to the invasion of Britain was to keep the Roman currency stable. Trajan's invasion of Dacia was also driven by mining...and the fact the Roman Empire went into a long inflation driven decline in the years after expansionism ended suggests the economy was unable to produce enough silver to sustain the currency's value. Goes to show nothing much changes...even if bankers have got more creative.

Find out if Calvus ever got his hands on any silver