The Common Peasant

[dnewhous]

I had some thoughts last night or this morning that I think are intriguing.

 

What was life like in the Roman Empire for the common man?

 

Now, in Italy, Greece, and northern Egypt I have the impression life was amazingly civilized. Life for a middle class person in Republic or Imperial Rome probably wasn't equaled until the 19th or even 20th century from my loose impressions. What percent of the population (even in wealthy urban centers) constituted "middle class" is another question. It must be pointed out that much of the wealth of Rome was based on a horrible system of slave labor. Every wealthy Roman home had catacombs below where the slaves slept. The biggest fact that gives me an impression of such a high standard of living is the fact Rome had a working sewage system, and it wasn't until the 19th century the European cities had any. Like in Monty Python and the Holy Grail

 

"He must be a king."

 

"What makes you say that?"

 

"Well, he hasn't got ***** all over him."

 

or as one 19th century English parliamentarian put it (I don't remember the exact quote)

"It began to dawn on the upper classes of England, that most of the nation's people were

living in *****."

 

But I haven't got to my main point yet. I have the impression that the vast majority of the Roman Empire was very much like "flyover country" in the United States today, only more so. I don't think that most Roman peasants had a standard of living much past neolithic standards, and I think commerce and wealth in the provinces were very sparse compared to Rome.

 

The dark ages had the bright side of decentralizing power so much that many independent commercial centers were able to develop in Europe. This is why Europe was able to develop into the dominant continent in the 19th century, whilst more developed civilizations (China) were stifled by centralized, self interested bureacracy.

 

I am wondering, about what century did life for a majority of people in Europe become as good as it was during the Pax Romana? I know it's hard to answer such an open ended question.

[journaldan]

Great points dnews. I don't have the educated background to say definitively one way or the other (though others on this forum do and soon will) but I would agree with the hypothesis you have put forward unless proven otherwise.

 

I am sure that the "middle class" in and around Rome and a few other major cities was relatively small, perhaps best compared in size and scope to what I know of the middle class structure in the late 1700s and early 1800s in the USA when most people were just trying to get by, slavery was common and the rich were elevated well beyond the "common man."

 

I am anxious for the experts on the board to chime in.

[Primus Pilus]

Its a fairly hotly debated topic. Consider that most people, at least within the Roman Empire, lived within a city, town or other more centralized environment. Roman cities were uniformly designed with differences mainly existing in placement of buildings, etc.

 

While city life in Londinium was considerably less hectic than Rome I'm sure, Roman culture still pervailed. There was the addition of Celtic influence certainly, but still the people there were city dwellers. Smaller provincial cities certainly didnt deal with the political mayhem that could happen in Rome and weren't subject to the passing fancy the way Rome could be, but essentially, daily life would've been pretty similar.

 

Latin citizens most assuredly lived in a liefestyle similar all over the empire. The difference then wouldnt be much different than the differences today between city and country folk. Its not necessarily about economic condition, but about a different lifestyle. There was certainly a smaller 'middle class' in the Roman world than there is today, but as opposed to many eras, they did actually have one.

 

Where you might have seen some differences, would be in the non latin people, such as Romanized Celts or what have you. They certainly would maintain a much different lifestyle when away from Roman influence. Some were poor, of course, just as many actual Latins were, but still a different status than the feudal system of the middle ages.

 

In that era, the monty python classic line certainly applies. Peasants could very well live in *****, where nobility and social elite lived a life of relative luxury.

[Viggen]

I was recently visiting the Magdalensberg (Noreia)

http://www.unrv.com/roman-events/magdalensberg.php

which is far away from Rome however it has everything rome had, just smaller, so i believe life was even in smaller places way ahead of its time, to add to that the life of the celts there was far from being barbaric or "dark age like" but had their own "civilisation" built over hundreds of years and just adapting to the roman life style..

 

Lots of the busts there show that while the man were dressed, spoke and behaved like romans (public life) the women dressed, spoke and behaved celtic (private life).

 

When you speak of fly over, you must remember that at the time you needed lots of "pitstops", so even remote places would have some sort of standard... However i think other then merchants and armies, people didnt really move that much?

 

cheers

viggen

[dnewhous]

Primuspilus, I am not sure how exactly to interpret your terminology. One possible reading of what you have said is that Roman citizenship was given only to people living in the city and that people living in the countryside merely had "Latin" status, which was an important distinction in the days of the late Republic (from what I've read) but I don't really know if the distinction means anything in the empire.

 

 

Also, how was sanitation in urban centers outside of Rome? Did any other city have a sewage system?

[Primus Pilus]

Sorry, I didnt mean latin status... but actual people of latin/Roman birth. Romans were city people. Whether they lived in Rome or were retired veterans living in a small colony, they still lived in a similar manner.

 

Pretty much all Roman cities had running water. Some small towns may not have had elaborate systems, but running water was a common feature throughout the empire. The Romans took care to build where water was accessable.

[dnewhous]

What about Romanized "barbarians"? How was their standard of living?

[Primus Pilus]

Similar in many aspects. Depends on who and where. Romanized Celts, for example, took to the Roman way of life quite well. Cities in Gaul or Britain weren't a great deal different than in Italy. It's the country people that maintained a more tribal custom. In these communities people weren't necessarily poor just because they didn't act 'Roman' 100% of the time.

 

I'm not saying there weren't poor people, I just believe that life was relatively good for most members of the Roman world. Those people who stayed within their tribal way of life may have had a different standard of living that we today might classify as 'poor', but it was simply how they lived.

[journaldan]

Its a fairly hotly debated topic.  Consider that most people, at least within the Roman Empire, lived within a city, town or other more centralized environment.  Roman cities were uniformly designed with differences mainly existing in placement of buildings, etc.

 

 

Primuspilas says:

Consider that most people, at least within the Roman Empire, lived within a city, town or other more centralized environment.

 

I doubt that "most" people lived in the city. Was agriculture really that advanced that most people were able to live and be supported by the agricultural efforts of others? Even until well into the 20th century, most people in the USA lived in "rural" settings rather than "urban" (or "suburban")

[Primus Pilus]

Let me rephrase that by saying citizenry. Until later in the empire the 3rd century to be more specific, true citizenry was still a fairly selective thing. After the various inclusion policies of several emperors, ending in 212 AD with Caracalla, essentially all people within the borders were made 'citizens'.

[Viggen]

Also, how was sanitation in urban centers outside of Rome? Did any other city have a sewage system?

Here is a photo from a sewage hole in the kitchen of a house (in Noreia, Noricum)

 

cheers

viggen