Holy Roman Empire Adalah

What is the Value of XCIII + (LXXIV - XLI) + XLIX?

Using Roman Numbers 1 to 100 chart, XCIII = 93, LXXIV = 74, XLI = 41, XLIX = 49. Converting the given problem into numbers, we have XCIII + (LXXIV - XLI) + XLIX = 93 + (74 - 41) + 49 = 175 = CLXXV

Rise and consolidation of imperial Rome

A period of unrest and civil wars in the 1st century bce marked the transition of Rome from a republic to an empire. This period encompassed the career of Julius Caesar, who eventually took full power over Rome as its dictator. After his assassination in 44 bce, the triumvirate of Mark Antony, Lepidus, and Octavian, Caesar’s nephew, ruled. It was not long before Octavian went to war against Antony in northern Africa, and after his victory at Actium (31 bce) he was crowned Rome’s first emperor, Augustus. His reign, from 27 bce to 14 ce, was distinguished by stability and peace.

Augustus established a form of government known as a principate, which combined some elements from the republic with the traditional powers of a monarchy. The Senate still functioned, though Augustus, as princeps, or first citizen, remained in control of the government..

With a mind toward maintaining the structure of power entrusted to his rule, Augustus began thinking early about who should follow him. Death played havoc with his attempts to select his successor. He had no son and his nephew Marcellus, his son-in-law Agrippa, and his grandsons Gaius and Lucius each predeceased him. He eventually chose Tiberius, a scion of the ultra-aristocratic Claudia gens, and in 4 ce adopted him as his son.

Tiberius (reigned 14–37) became the first successor in the Julio-Claudian dynasty and ruled as an able administrator but cruel tyrant. His great-nephew Caligula (37–41) reigned as an absolutist, his short reign filled with reckless spending, callous murders, and humiliation of the Senate. Claudius (41–54) centralized state finances in the imperial household, thus making rapid strides in organizing the imperial bureaucracy, but was ruthless toward the senators and equites. Nero (54–68) left administration to capable advisers for a few years but then asserted himself as a vicious despot. He brought the dynasty to its end by being the first emperor to suffer damnatio memoriae: his reign was officially stricken from the record by order of the Senate.

Following a war of succession, Vespasian became emperor, and the Flavian dynasty was established. His reign (69–79) was noted for his reorganization of the army, making it more loyal and professional; for his expansion of the membership of the Senate, bringing in administrators with a sense of service; for his increase and systematization of taxation; and for his strengthening of the frontiers of the empire (though little new territory was added). The brief but popular reign of his son Titus (79–81) was followed by the autocracy of Domitian (81–96), Vespasian’s other son, who fought the senatorial class and instituted taxes and confiscations for costly buildings, games, and shows. A reign of terror in his final years was ended by his assassination. The Flavian dynasty, like the Julio-Claudian, ended with an emperor whose memory was officially damned.

How to Write Roman Numerals from 1 to 100?

To write 1 to 100 in Roman numerals, we follow a certain set of rules. For example, let us consider the number 51. We know that 50 in Roman numerals is expressed by the letter L, and 1 is denoted by the letter I. So, we represent 51 as LI. The rules to write Roman numerals from 1 to 100 are given above in detail on this page.

Referring to the Roman Counting 1 to 100, we can see that the Roman numeral for 100 is C. This means the letter C represents 100 in Roman numerals.

This website uses cookies to collect information about how you interact with our website. We use this information in order to improve and customize your browsing experience and for analytics and metrics about our visitors. To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy.

How Many Twin Prime Numbers are there Between Roman Numerals 1 to 100?

Twin prime numbers are prime numbers whose absolute difference is 2. Twin prime number pairs between 1 to 100 are: (3, 5), (5, 7), (11, 13), (17, 19), (29, 31), (41, 43), (59, 61), (71, 73). Therefore, between roman numerals 1 and 100, there are 8 twin prime numbers.

Trade and commodities

Roman provinces traded among themselves, but trade extended outside the frontiers to regions as far away as China and India. Chinese trade was mostly conducted overland through middle men along the Silk Road; Indian trade also occurred by sea from Egyptian ports. The main commodity was grain. Also traded were olive oil, foodstuffs, garum (fish sauce), slaves, ore and manufactured metal objects, fibres and textiles, timber, pottery, glassware, marble, papyrus, spices and materia medica, ivory, pearls, and gemstones. Though most provinces could produce wine, regional varietals were desirable and wine was a central trade good.[276]

Geography and demography

The Roman Empire was one of the largest in history, with contiguous territories throughout Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East. The Latin phrase imperium sine fine ("empire without end") expressed the ideology that neither time nor space limited the Empire. In Virgil's Aeneid, limitless empire is said to be granted to the Romans by Jupiter.[58] This claim of universal dominion was renewed when the Empire came under Christian rule in the 4th century.[h] In addition to annexing large regions, the Romans directly altered their geography, for example cutting down entire forests.[60]

Roman expansion was mostly accomplished under the Republic, though parts of northern Europe were conquered in the 1st century, when Roman control in Europe, Africa, and Asia was strengthened. Under Augustus, a "global map of the known world" was displayed for the first time in public at Rome, coinciding with the creation of the most comprehensive political geography that survives from antiquity, the Geography of Strabo. When Augustus died, the account of his achievements (Res Gestae) prominently featured the geographical cataloguing of the Empire. Geography alongside meticulous written records were central concerns of Roman Imperial administration.

The Empire reached its largest expanse under Trajan (r. 98–117), encompassing 5 million km2.[16][17] The traditional population estimate of 55–60 million inhabitants accounted for between one-sixth and one-fourth of the world's total population and made it the most populous unified political entity in the West until the mid-19th century.[67] Recent demographic studies have argued for a population peak from 70 million to more than 100 million.[68] Each of the three largest cities in the Empire – Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch – was almost twice the size of any European city at the beginning of the 17th century.

As the historian Christopher Kelly described it:

Then the empire stretched from Hadrian's Wall in drizzle-soaked northern England to the sun-baked banks of the Euphrates in Syria; from the great Rhine–Danube river system, which snaked across the fertile, flat lands of Europe from the Low Countries to the Black Sea, to the rich plains of the North African coast and the luxuriant gash of the Nile Valley in Egypt. The empire completely circled the Mediterranean ... referred to by its conquerors as mare nostrum—'our sea'.

Trajan's successor Hadrian adopted a policy of maintaining rather than expanding the empire. Borders (fines) were marked, and the frontiers (limites) patrolled. The most heavily fortified borders were the most unstable.[24] Hadrian's Wall, which separated the Roman world from what was perceived as an ever-present barbarian threat, is the primary surviving monument of this effort.[71]

Latin and Greek were the main languages of the Empire,[i] but the Empire was deliberately multilingual. Andrew Wallace-Hadrill says "The main desire of the Roman government was to make itself understood".[77] At the start of the Empire, knowledge of Greek was useful to pass as educated nobility and knowledge of Latin was useful for a career in the military, government, or law.[78] Bilingual inscriptions indicate the everyday interpenetration of the two languages.[79]

Latin and Greek's mutual linguistic and cultural influence is a complex topic.[80] Latin words incorporated into Greek were very common by the early imperial era, especially for military, administration, and trade and commerce matters.[81] Greek grammar, literature, poetry and philosophy shaped Latin language and culture.[82]

There was never a legal requirement for Latin in the Empire, but it represented a certain status.[85] High standards of Latin, Latinitas, started with the advent of Latin literature.[86] Due to the flexible language policy of the Empire, a natural competition of language emerged that spurred Latinitas, to defend Latin against the stronger cultural influence of Greek. Over time Latin usage was used to project power and a higher social class.[88] Most of the emperors were bilingual but had a preference for Latin in the public sphere for political reasons, a "rule" that first started during the Punic Wars. Different emperors up until Justinian would attempt to require the use of Latin in various sections of the administration but there is no evidence that a linguistic imperialism existed during the early Empire.

After all freeborn inhabitants were universally enfranchised in 212, many Roman citizens would have lacked a knowledge of Latin. The wide use of Koine Greek was what enabled the spread of Christianity and reflects its role as the lingua franca of the Mediterranean during the time of the Empire. Following Diocletian's reforms in the 3rd century CE, there was a decline in the knowledge of Greek in the west. Spoken Latin later fragmented into the incipient romance languages in the 7th century CE following the collapse of the Empire's west.[95]

The dominance of Latin and Greek among the literate elite obscure the continuity of other spoken languages within the Empire.[96] Latin, referred to in its spoken form as Vulgar Latin, gradually replaced Celtic and Italic languages.[97][98] References to interpreters indicate the continuing use of local languages, particularly in Egypt with Coptic, and in military settings along the Rhine and Danube. Roman jurists also show a concern for local languages such as Punic, Gaulish, and Aramaic in assuring the correct understanding of laws and oaths. In Africa, Libyco-Berber and Punic were used in inscriptions into the 2nd century.[96] In Syria, Palmyrene soldiers used their dialect of Aramaic for inscriptions, an exception to the rule that Latin was the language of the military. The last reference to Gaulish was between 560 and 575.[101][102] The emergent Gallo-Romance languages would then be shaped by Gaulish.[103] Proto-Basque or Aquitanian evolved with Latin loan words to modern Basque.[104] The Thracian language, as were several now-extinct languages in Anatolia, are attested in Imperial-era inscriptions.[96]

The Empire was remarkably multicultural, with "astonishing cohesive capacity" to create shared identity while encompassing diverse peoples. Public monuments and communal spaces open to all—such as forums, amphitheatres, racetracks and baths—helped foster a sense of "Romanness".

Roman society had multiple, overlapping social hierarchies. The civil war preceding Augustus caused upheaval,[109] but did not effect an immediate redistribution of wealth and social power. From the perspective of the lower classes, a peak was merely added to the social pyramid.[110] Personal relationships—patronage, friendship (amicitia), family, marriage—continued to influence politics. By the time of Nero, however, it was not unusual to find a former slave who was richer than a freeborn citizen, or an equestrian who exercised greater power than a senator.

The blurring of the Republic's more rigid hierarchies led to increased social mobility,[113] both upward and downward, to a greater extent than all other well-documented ancient societies.[114] Women, freedmen, and slaves had opportunities to profit and exercise influence in ways previously less available to them. Social life, particularly for those whose personal resources were limited, was further fostered by a proliferation of voluntary associations and confraternities (collegia and sodalitates): professional and trade guilds, veterans' groups, religious sodalities, drinking and dining clubs, performing troupes, and burial societies.[118]

According to the jurist Gaius, the essential distinction in the Roman "law of persons" was that all humans were either free (liberi) or slaves (servi).[119] The legal status of free persons was further defined by their citizenship. Most citizens held limited rights (such as the ius Latinum, "Latin right"), but were entitled to legal protections and privileges not enjoyed by non-citizens. Free people not considered citizens, but living within the Roman world, were peregrini, non-Romans. In 212, the Constitutio Antoniniana extended citizenship to all freeborn inhabitants of the empire. This legal egalitarianism required a far-reaching revision of existing laws that distinguished between citizens and non-citizens.

Freeborn Roman women were considered citizens, but did not vote, hold political office, or serve in the military. A mother's citizen status determined that of her children, as indicated by the phrase ex duobus civibus Romanis natos ("children born of two Roman citizens").[j] A Roman woman kept her own family name (nomen) for life. Children most often took the father's name, with some exceptions. Women could own property, enter contracts, and engage in business.[125] Inscriptions throughout the Empire honour women as benefactors in funding public works, an indication they could hold considerable fortunes.[126]

The archaic manus marriage in which the woman was subject to her husband's authority was largely abandoned by the Imperial era, and a married woman retained ownership of any property she brought into the marriage. Technically she remained under her father's legal authority, even though she moved into her husband's home, but when her father died she became legally emancipated. This arrangement was a factor in the degree of independence Roman women enjoyed compared to many other cultures up to the modern period:[128] although she had to answer to her father in legal matters, she was free of his direct scrutiny in daily life, and her husband had no legal power over her. Although it was a point of pride to be a "one-man woman" (univira) who had married only once, there was little stigma attached to divorce, nor to speedy remarriage after being widowed or divorced.[131] Girls had equal inheritance rights with boys if their father died without leaving a will.[132] A mother's right to own and dispose of property, including setting the terms of her will, gave her enormous influence over her sons into adulthood.[133]

As part of the Augustan programme to restore traditional morality and social order, moral legislation attempted to regulate conduct as a means of promoting "family values". Adultery was criminalized, and defined broadly as an illicit sex act (stuprum) between a male citizen and a married woman, or between a married woman and any man other than her husband. That is, a double standard was in place: a married woman could have sex only with her husband, but a married man did not commit adultery if he had sex with a prostitute or person of marginalized status.[135] Childbearing was encouraged: a woman who had given birth to three children was granted symbolic honours and greater legal freedom (the ius trium liberorum).[136]

At the time of Augustus, as many as 35% of the people in Roman Italy were slaves, making Rome one of five historical "slave societies" in which slaves constituted at least a fifth of the population and played a major role in the economy.[k] Slavery was a complex institution that supported traditional Roman social structures as well as contributing economic utility. In urban settings, slaves might be professionals such as teachers, physicians, chefs, and accountants; the majority of slaves provided trained or unskilled labour. Agriculture and industry, such as milling and mining, relied on the exploitation of slaves. Outside Italy, slaves were on average an estimated 10 to 20% of the population, sparse in Roman Egypt but more concentrated in some Greek areas. Expanding Roman ownership of arable land and industries affected preexisting practices of slavery in the provinces.[139] Although slavery has often been regarded as waning in the 3rd and 4th centuries, it remained an integral part of Roman society until gradually ceasing in the 6th and 7th centuries with the disintegration of the complex Imperial economy.[140]

Laws pertaining to slavery were "extremely intricate". Slaves were considered property and had no legal personhood. They could be subjected to forms of corporal punishment not normally exercised on citizens, sexual exploitation, torture, and summary execution. A slave could not as a matter of law be raped; a slave's rapist had to be prosecuted by the owner for property damage under the Aquilian Law.[142] Slaves had no right to the form of legal marriage called conubium, but their unions were sometimes recognized. Technically, a slave could not own property, but a slave who conducted business might be given access to an individual fund (peculium) that he could use, depending on the degree of trust and co-operation between owner and slave.[145] Within a household or workplace, a hierarchy of slaves might exist, with one slave acting as the master of others. Talented slaves might accumulate a large enough peculium to justify their freedom, or be manumitted for services rendered. Manumission had become frequent enough that in 2 BC a law (Lex Fufia Caninia) limited the number of slaves an owner was allowed to free in his will.

Following the Servile Wars of the Republic, legislation under Augustus and his successors shows a driving concern for controlling the threat of rebellions through limiting the size of work groups, and for hunting down fugitive slaves.[148] Over time slaves gained increased legal protection, including the right to file complaints against their masters. A bill of sale might contain a clause stipulating that the slave could not be employed for prostitution, as prostitutes in ancient Rome were often slaves. The burgeoning trade in eunuchs in the late 1st century prompted legislation that prohibited the castration of a slave against his will "for lust or gain".[150]

Roman slavery was not based on race.[151] Generally, slaves in Italy were indigenous Italians,[152] with a minority of foreigners (including both slaves and freedmen) estimated at 5% of the total in the capital at its peak, where their number was largest. Foreign slaves had higher mortality and lower birth rates than natives, and were sometimes even subjected to mass expulsions.[153] The average recorded age at death for the slaves of the city of Rome was seventeen and a half years (17.2 for males; 17.9 for females).[154]

During the period of republican expansionism when slavery had become pervasive, war captives were a main source of slaves. The range of ethnicities among slaves to some extent reflected that of the armies Rome defeated in war, and the conquest of Greece brought a number of highly skilled and educated slaves. Slaves were also traded in markets and sometimes sold by pirates. Infant abandonment and self-enslavement among the poor were other sources. Vernae, by contrast, were "homegrown" slaves born to female slaves within the household, estate or farm. Although they had no special legal status, an owner who mistreated or failed to care for his vernae faced social disapproval, as they were considered part of the family household and in some cases might actually be the children of free males in the family.[156]

Rome differed from Greek city-states in allowing freed slaves to become citizens; any future children of a freedman were born free, with full rights of citizenship. After manumission, a slave who had belonged to a Roman citizen enjoyed active political freedom (libertas), including the right to vote.[157] His former master became his patron (patronus): the two continued to have customary and legal obligations to each other.[158][159] A freedman was not entitled to hold public office or the highest state priesthoods, but could play a priestly role. He could not marry a woman from a senatorial family, nor achieve legitimate senatorial rank himself, but during the early Empire, freedmen held key positions in the government bureaucracy, so much so that Hadrian limited their participation by law.[159] The rise of successful freedmen—through political influence or wealth—is a characteristic of early Imperial society. The prosperity of a high-achieving group of freedmen is attested by inscriptions throughout the Empire.

The Latin word ordo (plural ordines) is translated variously and inexactly into English as "class, order, rank". One purpose of the Roman census was to determine the ordo to which an individual belonged.[160] Two of the highest ordines in Rome were the senatorial and equestrian. Outside Rome, cities or colonies were led by decurions, also known as curiales.[161]

"Senator" was not itself an elected office in ancient Rome; an individual gained admission to the Senate after he had been elected to and served at least one term as an executive magistrate. A senator also had to meet a minimum property requirement of 1 million sestertii.[162] Not all men who qualified for the ordo senatorius chose to take a Senate seat, which required legal domicile at Rome. Emperors often filled vacancies in the 600-member body by appointment.[163] A senator's son belonged to the ordo senatorius, but he had to qualify on his own merits for admission to the Senate. A senator could be removed for violating moral standards.

In the time of Nero, senators were still primarily from Italy, with some from the Iberian peninsula and southern France; men from the Greek-speaking provinces of the East began to be added under Vespasian. The first senator from the easternmost province, Cappadocia, was admitted under Marcus Aurelius.[l] By the Severan dynasty (193–235), Italians made up less than half the Senate.[167] During the 3rd century, domicile at Rome became impractical, and inscriptions attest to senators who were active in politics and munificence in their homeland (patria).

Senators were the traditional governing class who rose through the cursus honorum, the political career track, but equestrians often possessed greater wealth and political power. Membership in the equestrian order was based on property; in Rome's early days, equites or knights had been distinguished by their ability to serve as mounted warriors, but cavalry service was a separate function in the Empire.[m] A census valuation of 400,000 sesterces and three generations of free birth qualified a man as an equestrian. The census of 28 BC uncovered large numbers of men who qualified, and in 14 AD, a thousand equestrians were registered at Cádiz and Padua alone.[n] Equestrians rose through a military career track (tres militiae) to become highly placed prefects and procurators within the Imperial administration.[172]

The rise of provincial men to the senatorial and equestrian orders is an aspect of social mobility in the early Empire. Roman aristocracy was based on competition, and unlike later European nobility, a Roman family could not maintain its position merely through hereditary succession or having title to lands.[173] Admission to the higher ordines brought distinction and privileges, but also responsibilities. In antiquity, a city depended on its leading citizens to fund public works, events, and services (munera). Maintaining one's rank required massive personal expenditures. Decurions were so vital for the functioning of cities that in the later Empire, as the ranks of the town councils became depleted, those who had risen to the Senate were encouraged to return to their hometowns, in an effort to sustain civic life.[175]

In the later Empire, the dignitas ("worth, esteem") that attended on senatorial or equestrian rank was refined further with titles such as vir illustris ("illustrious man"). The appellation clarissimus (Greek lamprotatos) was used to designate the dignitas of certain senators and their immediate family, including women. "Grades" of equestrian status proliferated.

As the republican principle of citizens' equality under the law faded, the symbolic and social privileges of the upper classes led to an informal division of Roman society into those who had acquired greater honours (honestiores) and humbler folk (humiliores). In general, honestiores were the members of the three higher "orders", along with certain military officers.[179] The granting of universal citizenship in 212 seems to have increased the competitive urge among the upper classes to have their superiority affirmed, particularly within the justice system.[180] Sentencing depended on the judgment of the presiding official as to the relative "worth" (dignitas) of the defendant: an honestior could pay a fine for a crime for which an humilior might receive a scourging.

Execution, which was an infrequent legal penalty for free men under the Republic,[182] could be quick and relatively painless for honestiores, while humiliores might suffer the kinds of torturous death previously reserved for slaves, such as crucifixion and condemnation to the beasts.[183] In the early Empire, those who converted to Christianity could lose their standing as honestiores, especially if they declined to fulfil religious responsibilities, and thus became subject to punishments that created the conditions of martyrdom.[184]

How Many Square Numbers are there Between Roman Numbers 1 to 100?

Perfect Squares between Roman numbers 1 to 100 are 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64, 81, 100. This implies, there are 10 perfect square numbers between Roman numbers 1 to 100.

Provincial government

An annexed territory became a Roman province in three steps: making a register of cities, taking a census, and surveying the land. Further government recordkeeping included births and deaths, real estate transactions, taxes, and juridical proceedings. In the 1st and 2nd centuries, the central government sent out around 160 officials annually to govern outside Italy. Among these officials were the Roman governors: magistrates elected at Rome who in the name of the Roman people governed senatorial provinces; or governors, usually of equestrian rank, who held their imperium on behalf of the emperor in imperial provinces, most notably Roman Egypt.[219] A governor had to make himself accessible to the people he governed, but he could delegate various duties. His staff, however, was minimal: his official attendants (apparitores), including lictors, heralds, messengers, scribes, and bodyguards; legates, both civil and military, usually of equestrian rank; and friends who accompanied him unofficially.

Other officials were appointed as supervisors of government finances. Separating fiscal responsibility from justice and administration was a reform of the Imperial era, to avoid provincial governors and tax farmers exploiting local populations for personal gain. Equestrian procurators, whose authority was originally "extra-judicial and extra-constitutional", managed both state-owned property and the personal property of the emperor (res privata). Because Roman government officials were few, a provincial who needed help with a legal dispute or criminal case might seek out any Roman perceived to have some official capacity.[222]

Roman courts held original jurisdiction over cases involving Roman citizens throughout the empire, but there were too few judicial functionaries to impose Roman law uniformly in the provinces. Most parts of the Eastern Empire already had well-established law codes and juridical procedures.[109] Generally, it was Roman policy to respect the mos regionis ("regional tradition" or "law of the land") and to regard local laws as a source of legal precedent and social stability.[109] The compatibility of Roman and local law was thought to reflect an underlying ius gentium, the "law of nations" or international law regarded as common and customary.[224] If provincial law conflicted with Roman law or custom, Roman courts heard appeals, and the emperor held final decision-making authority.[109][o]

In the West, law had been administered on a highly localized or tribal basis, and private property rights may have been a novelty of the Roman era, particularly among Celts. Roman law facilitated the acquisition of wealth by a pro-Roman elite.[109] The extension of universal citizenship to all free inhabitants of the Empire in 212 required the uniform application of Roman law, replacing local law codes that had applied to non-citizens. Diocletian's efforts to stabilize the Empire after the Crisis of the Third Century included two major compilations of law in four years, the Codex Gregorianus and the Codex Hermogenianus, to guide provincial administrators in setting consistent legal standards.[225]

The pervasiveness of Roman law throughout Western Europe enormously influenced the Western legal tradition, reflected by continued use of Latin legal terminology in modern law.

Taxation under the Empire amounted to about 5% of its gross product. The typical tax rate for individuals ranged from 2 to 5%. The tax code was "bewildering" in its complicated system of direct and indirect taxes, some paid in cash and some in kind. Taxes might be specific to a province, or kinds of properties such as fisheries; they might be temporary. Tax collection was justified by the need to maintain the military,[229] and taxpayers sometimes got a refund if the army captured a surplus of booty. In-kind taxes were accepted from less-monetized areas, particularly those who could supply grain or goods to army camps.

The primary source of direct tax revenue was individuals, who paid a poll tax and a tax on their land, construed as a tax on its produce or productive capacity. Tax obligations were determined by the census: each head of household provided a headcount of his household, as well as an accounting of his property. A major source of indirect-tax revenue was the portoria, customs and tolls on trade, including among provinces. Towards the end of his reign, Augustus instituted a 4% tax on the sale of slaves,[233] which Nero shifted from the purchaser to the dealers, who responded by raising their prices.[234] An owner who manumitted a slave paid a "freedom tax", calculated at 5% of value.[p] An inheritance tax of 5% was assessed when Roman citizens above a certain net worth left property to anyone outside their immediate family. Revenues from the estate tax and from an auction tax went towards the veterans' pension fund (aerarium militare).

Low taxes helped the Roman aristocracy increase their wealth, which equalled or exceeded the revenues of the central government. An emperor sometimes replenished his treasury by confiscating the estates of the "super-rich", but in the later period, the resistance of the wealthy to paying taxes was one of the factors contributing to the collapse of the Empire.

The Empire is best thought of as a network of regional economies, based on a form of "political capitalism" in which the state regulated commerce to assure its own revenues. Economic growth, though not comparable to modern economies, was greater than that of most other societies prior to industrialization. Territorial conquests permitted a large-scale reorganization of land use that resulted in agricultural surplus and specialization, particularly in north Africa. Some cities were known for particular industries. The scale of urban building indicates a significant construction industry. Papyri preserve complex accounting methods that suggest elements of economic rationalism, and the Empire was highly monetized. Although the means of communication and transport were limited in antiquity, transportation in the 1st and 2nd centuries expanded greatly, and trade routes connected regional economies. The supply contracts for the army drew on local suppliers near the base (castrum), throughout the province, and across provincial borders. Economic historians vary in their calculations of the gross domestic product during the Principate.[241] In the sample years of 14, 100, and 150 AD, estimates of per capita GDP range from 166 to 380 HS. The GDP per capita of Italy is estimated as 40[242] to 66%[243] higher than in the rest of the Empire, due to tax transfers from the provinces and the concentration of elite income.

Economic dynamism resulted in social mobility. Although aristocratic values permeated traditional elite society, wealth requirements for rank indicate a strong tendency towards plutocracy. Prestige could be obtained through investing one's wealth in grand estates or townhouses, luxury items, public entertainments, funerary monuments, and religious dedications. Guilds (collegia) and corporations (corpora) provided support for individuals to succeed through networking.[179] "There can be little doubt that the lower classes of ... provincial towns of the Roman Empire enjoyed a high standard of living not equaled again in Western Europe until the 19th century".[244] Households in the top 1.5% of income distribution captured about 20% of income. The "vast majority" produced more than half of the total income, but lived near subsistence.[245]

The early Empire was monetized to a near-universal extent, using money as a way to express prices and debts.[247] The sestertius (English "sesterces", symbolized as HS) was the basic unit of reckoning value into the 4th century,[248] though the silver denarius, worth four sesterces, was also used beginning in the Severan dynasty. The smallest coin commonly circulated was the bronze as, one-tenth denarius.[250] Bullion and ingots seem not to have counted as pecunia ("money") and were used only on the frontiers. Romans in the first and second centuries counted coins, rather than weighing them—an indication that the coin was valued on its face. This tendency towards fiat money led to the debasement of Roman coinage in the later Empire. The standardization of money throughout the Empire promoted trade and market integration.[247] The high amount of metal coinage in circulation increased the money supply for trading or saving.[252] Rome had no central bank, and regulation of the banking system was minimal. Banks of classical antiquity typically kept less in reserves than the full total of customers' deposits. A typical bank had fairly limited capital, and often only one principal. Seneca assumes that anyone involved in Roman commerce needs access to credit. A professional deposit banker received and held deposits for a fixed or indefinite term, and lent money to third parties. The senatorial elite were involved heavily in private lending, both as creditors and borrowers.[253] The holder of a debt could use it as a means of payment by transferring it to another party, without cash changing hands. Although it has sometimes been thought that ancient Rome lacked documentary transactions, the system of banks throughout the Empire permitted the exchange of large sums without physically transferring coins, in part because of the risks of moving large amounts of cash. Only one serious credit shortage is known to have occurred in the early Empire, in 33 AD;[254] generally, available capital exceeded the amount needed by borrowers. The central government itself did not borrow money, and without public debt had to fund deficits from cash reserves.

Emperors of the Antonine and Severan dynasties debased the currency, particularly the denarius, under the pressures of meeting military payrolls.[248] Sudden inflation under Commodus damaged the credit market. In the mid-200s, the supply of specie contracted sharply.[248] Conditions during the Crisis of the Third Century—such as reductions in long-distance trade, disruption of mining operations, and the physical transfer of gold coinage outside the empire by invading enemies—greatly diminished the money supply and the banking sector.[248] Although Roman coinage had long been fiat money or fiduciary currency, general economic anxieties came to a head under Aurelian, and bankers lost confidence in coins. Despite Diocletian's introduction of the gold solidus and monetary reforms, the credit market of the Empire never recovered its former robustness.

The main mining regions of the Empire were the Iberian Peninsula (silver, copper, lead, iron and gold);[4] Gaul (gold, silver, iron);[256] Britain (mainly iron, lead, tin),[257] the Danubian provinces (gold, iron);[258] Macedonia and Thrace (gold, silver); and Asia Minor (gold, silver, iron, tin). Intensive large-scale mining—of alluvial deposits, and by means of open-cast mining and underground mining—took place from the reign of Augustus up to the early 3rd century, when the instability of the Empire disrupted production.[citation needed]

Hydraulic mining allowed base and precious metals to be extracted on a proto-industrial scale.[259] The total annual iron output is estimated at 82,500 tonnes.[260] Copper and lead production levels were unmatched until the Industrial Revolution.[261][262][263][264] At its peak around the mid-2nd century, the Roman silver stock is estimated at 10,000 t, five to ten times larger than the combined silver mass of medieval Europe and the Caliphate around 800 AD.[263][265] As an indication of the scale of Roman metal production, lead pollution in the Greenland ice sheet quadrupled over prehistoric levels during the Imperial era and dropped thereafter.

FAQs on Roman Numerals 1 to 100

Fall in the West and survival in the East

The Western Roman Empire began to disintegrate in the early 5th century. The Romans fought off all invaders, most famously Attila,[48] but the empire had assimilated so many Germanic peoples of dubious loyalty to Rome that the empire started to dismember itself. Most chronologies place the end of the Western Roman Empire in 476, when Romulus Augustulus was forced to abdicate to the Germanic warlord Odoacer.[50][51][52]

Odoacer ended the Western Empire by declaring Zeno sole emperor and placing himself as Zeno's nominal subordinate. In reality, Italy was ruled by Odoacer alone.[50][51][53] The Eastern Roman Empire, called the Byzantine Empire by later historians, continued until the reign of Constantine XI Palaiologos, the last Roman emperor. He died in battle in 1453 against Mehmed II and his Ottoman forces during the siege of Constantinople. Mehmed II adopted the title of caesar in an attempt to claim a connection to the former Empire.[54] His claim was soon recognized by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, but not by most European monarchs.