The Origin of Roman Power and Wealth

[Peter1469]

Their are texts older than others that seem to be the basis of the Jesus story. They have been discussed and it isn't really worth arguing over.

There are several paths to the truth.

[Ethereal]

The Romans borrowed heavily from the Greeks. No question about it. They even modeled their earliest military system on the Greek phalanx. But what exactly did it mean to borrow from the Greeks? Surely to borrow from Sparta could entail something quite different than borrowing from Athens. Moreover, why are we talking about the Roman Empire instead of a Greek empire? Granted, the Macedonians created a Greek" empire but Macedonia was the the most culturally backward part of Greece and was considered half barbaric by the Greeks themselves. I think there was something more going on there.

Still, one cannot deny the influence of Greek religion, customs and mores on the Romans.

My way of looking it at is based largely on the framework that Adam Smith elucidated in his Wealth of Nations.

First and foremost, economic strength must precede military and political strength. Without the necessary resources, a fighting spirit and organization won't get you very far.

So I try to explain Roman strength from an economic perspective. However, economic prosperity does not occur in a vacuum either, so there must be something underlying that as well.

I surmise it is cultural, specifically, the intellectual traditions.

That is where the Greeks come into it.

[Mister D]

Their are texts older than others that seem to be the basis of the Jesus story. They have been discussed and it isn't really worth arguing over.

There are several paths to the truth.

What texts are those, Pietro?

That's great but I'm not sure what that has to do with any of this. Do you?

[Mister D]

My way of looking it at is based largely on the framework that Adam Smith elucidated in his Wealth of Nations.

First and foremost, economic strength must precede military and political strength. Without the necessary resources, a fighting spirit and organization won't get you very far.

So I try to explain Roman strength from an economic perspective. However, economic prosperity does not occur in a vacuum either, so there must be something underlying that as well.

I surmise it is cultural, specifically, the intellectual traditions.

That is where the Greeks come into it.

You have to remember though that Smith wrote in the midst of European colonialism and he resided in a state that was quickly becoming the premier colonial power. Smith was, IMO, quite clearly a man of his times who, consciously or not, accepted some of the fundamental premises of his day among them the primacy of economics. It was precisely in the time of Adam Smith that economics, as such, was coming into its own as a phenomenon perceived to be independent of cultural or intellectual particularity.

I don't think economic strength need proceed political and military strength. I would point to the nomads of the Asian steppe (e.g. the Huns, the Mongols, the Turks) as examples. You could also mention the Aztecs and Inca. I think the development of economic strength is crucial to a have a lasting civilization impact. I would agree with that.

[Peter1469]

What texts are those, Pietro?

That's great but I'm not sure what that has to do with any of this. Do you?

From Sumer. They have the same myths the latter Christians had.


And they spoke of humans who existed long before they did.