Roman Empire GDP Per Capita Map
Roman Empire GDP Per Capita Map Shows That Romans Were Poorer Than Any Country in 2015.
On average, the GDP per capita across the whole Empire, was only $570. According to the World Bank, the Democratic Republic of the Congo is currently the world’s poorest nation with GDP per capita of $766 in 2012.
I suppose the morale is don't fuck with Congo!
October 12th, 2017 1:54am
Most people were subsistence farmers, and not very good ones - Roman Empire had a mostly shitty climate, and poor quality plows.
October 12th, 2017 2:03am
And no electricity, or steam-engines.
The steam-engine, and the manufacturing boom it enabled, are keys to our current living standards.
Before that, all you had was the power of horse, or perhaps stream power with a water-wheel -- but that wasn't very scalable.
October 12th, 2017 1:03pm
October 12th, 2017 1:07pm
The Purpose of the Parthian Galvanic Cells: A First-Century A. D. Electric Battery Used for Analgesia
Paul T. Keyser
Journal of Near Eastern Studies
Vol. 52, No. 2 (Apr., 1993), pp. 81-98
October 12th, 2017 1:09pm
Nah, Hero's steam engine just spun a ball, it was a toy.
It never occurred to him to attach it to a belt, to drive machinery with.
But +1 for effort.
October 12th, 2017 1:09pm
In 1672 Ferdinand Verbiest built and demonstrated a steam-turbine-powered car. His wasn't even a new invention but merely a recreation of a preexisting invention.
October 12th, 2017 1:13pm
October 12th, 2017 1:15pm
Well, he DESIGNED one, but it's debateable whether he actually BUILT it. Your 'picture' isn't a 'picture', it's a drawing of a design.
The 1670's are quite past the Roman era, so I don't see how that argument even applies.
October 12th, 2017 1:31pm
Photo of a drawing of his car. Are you this reality challenged?
October 12th, 2017 1:39pm
I have no doubt you have read Verbiest's Astronomia Europaea in the Latin. There's no doubt from the phrasing and tenses that he did in fact build and demonstrate his working steam car.
What is your source to claim he did not and it is fabricated? Please explain, clearly making reference to the specific Latin phrases of his work.
October 12th, 2017 1:41pm
Um, hello? It's in my link?
"Early documentation suggests that Father Verbiest built the steam vehicle for Chinese Emperor Chien Lung, but this has been under much debate."
"under much debate". Since they didn't HAVE photography in that day, I guess you couldn't realistically post a "photo".
October 12th, 2017 1:50pm
In any event, the point is the Roman GDP was built WITHOUT the steam-engine (even if one existed at the time) and that limits the Roman Empire GDP far below what we after the Industrial Revolution can achieve.
October 12th, 2017 1:52pm
But in the Roman Empire the water mill was introduced, and as such it would be a vital step towards later more advanced mechanisation.
Technology builds on previous achievements.
One cannot point at one step in isolation, the effort was a deep stack. And the Roman Empire was very important in spreading technology over a large area, where it would in the end find a fertile soil for further development.
They channelled advanced metallurgy from South Asia - around Afghanistan - towards Western Europe.
And it is highly probable that shipping technology of the North Sea Germans got a decisive boost through contacts with the Roman vessels, which led to the expansion of the Anglo-Saxons, Frisian - and ultimately Dutch - navigation, and the Viking expansion.
All right, but apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
October 12th, 2017 3:33pm
Estimating the GDP of an ancient empire must have a large margin of error.
October 12th, 2017 4:18pm
For GDP per Capita, in slave states, do you include the slaves in the population count?
October 12th, 2017 4:25pm
Yes you count slaves, just like you count peasants.
The Romans didn't have the heavy plow (although they toyed with it towards the end) or the 3 field system. They weren't just an industrial revolution behind us, but a major agricultural one too. As a result, many of the areas we today think of as fertile farmland in Northern Europe, we're either not used or poorly used for agriculture.
October 13th, 2017 4:04am
I've read that agricultural productivity was lower in the Ottoman Empire (including Wallachia and Moldova) than Austro-Hungary (including Transylvania) but haven't looked much into why.
And that the introduction of corn after it's discovery in the Americas was a life saver, since even with primitive techniques it has a much better yield than wheat.
October 13th, 2017 6:17am
Northern Europe became a productive farming area between 900ad and 1400ad. To the Romans it was mainly economic dead weight that they had to guard from barbarians, so was probably a massive economic drag on the empire.
Their main grain growing areas were Egypt and to a much lesser extent Tunisia. How bad is your agriculture, for these to be your most productive areas? The main thing that these two places are that they are easy to plow, plant and irrigate.
October 13th, 2017 6:28am
And yep corn is important too.
October 13th, 2017 6:29am
> Northern Europe became a productive farming area between 900ad and 1400ad. To the Romans it was mainly economic dead weight that they had to guard from barbarians, so was probably a massive economic drag on the empire.
That is not true.
The loes grounds in Belgium and Northern France were very productive and could support the legions protecting the Rhine limes, as could the corresponding zone in Britannia, who could even export grain after feeding the soldiers.
Belgium became an economic powerhouse, that could hold its own ground amidst the permanent civil wars that raged from about 200 AD.
The border to the North was being protected by Germanic immigrants, the Franks, and when the later armies of mercenaries, the Vandals, Visigoths, Ostrogoths and Burgundians entered the Empire, the Frankish part kept control and would restore an Empire in the West, which they themselves still regarded as Roman.
It is true that the Romans didn't value the sandy grounds of the North German plane, and neither did the people living there when they had the choice to migrate :-)
What started around 900 AD was a massive exploitation of wilderness, like over half of the area of the Netherlands was transformed from empty peat fields into farm land.
That was a larger growth than the technical improvements of the agriculture on the existing fields.
The 'darkness' of the 'Dark Ages' has been very much exaggerated, and many regions in Western Europe were rather prosperous at the time. They just had a bad press, and were not into writing their own propaganda.