Delcine, part 2

About two weeks ago I wrote a post on settlement scaling, which is a theory that cities and cultures grew and settled in a similar manner of land consumption and hierarchy. This, even though they grew independent of one another. This shows a commonality to the human mind, the human spirit, and of course the human ability (limitations) of movement. Yet, there is also the issue of civilization decline.  Is there a commonality among past civilizations that went into decline and became no more? The post last week focused on the decline in Rapa Nui, also known as Easter Island, and the Mayan culture on the Yucatan peninsula. This post will focus on a western culture from which we currently draw much of the basis of law and our very culture--Rome.  It will end with lessons for today.

Curia Building, Rome, home of the Roman Senate
Author photo from 1990

Interior of Pantheon in Rome, showing oculus
1990 Author photo

The Roman Empire is viewed as one of the greatest of historical societies or civilizations. Rome began as a republic and would turn into a dictatorship (generally agreed by scholars to be about 27 BC when Octavian became the emperor Caesar Augustus). Part of what we have in our culture today derives from the former Roman Republic and/or Empire. Edward Gibbon attributed the decline to the rise of Christianity and political effects. Others spoke of invasions, plague, population decline and lack of military spirit. Gibbon placed Rome's golden age for less than a hundred year time span--98 to 180 AD.  Yet, this was also the time during the dictatorship that the seeds of decline were planted. Gibbon was so engrossed in the enlightenment thinking cause celeb of placing blame on Christianity that he failed to recognize what had truly occurred in the Empire, particularly during his beloved Antoine age. The golden age Gibbon so highly praised was based on slavery, and as times turned against the use of slaves, the labor and economic markets failed to adjust. Perhaps the slow rise of Christianity had something to do with the decline of slavery, but our present day thinking we would not regard that as bad. In any event at that time, Christian communities were small and underground, and certainly were not setting forth moral standards of the Empire, to know and understand this all one has to do is look at what was occuring in the coliseum, and other venues.  The ruling class of the Empire continued the exploitation of the labor class and further reduced the little freedom those workers had. This change from slave to serf production is often thought to have led to the revolts of the third century. The majority of people failed to benefit from their work and that is one of the causes of the downfall of the Roman civilization.  Ah, the glory and grandeur of Rome!

Roman Forum
1990 Author photo

These aspects of decline of the Roman Empire, however, probably began from something more common and less abrupt--depletion of farmland in and near Italy. Reduced farm land fertility in the area near and around Rome led to a reliance on crops from the hinterlands. This led to an increase in trade, but with this increase, just was we saw with the Mayan civilization, so too did Rome develop, or further enhance, a class of the top ten percent. The need for productivity led to the Roman version of what we would call today factory farms. These large farms, founded on the periphery by Roman emigrants were facilitated, according to one historian, by moneylenders and a policy of Roman officials “who would guarantee borrowers against bad debts.” Sounds like the 2008 housing crisis, and the US Government guarantee of bad debts. Small tenant farmers were transformed into servile dependents, with limited legal and economic position. The movement of production to the outer limits of the empire led to a the rise of wealth in the hands of a few. Those few, just like in Rapa Nui and in Maya, would fail to recognize the root causes and problems that occur when wealth accumulates in the hands of the economic elite.  The wealthy would argue against any improvement which could threaten their power and holdings. Thus, the vast majority of citizens and people of Rome lacked the ability to “taste the fruits of their labor,” consume goods and hence there “was a shallow internal market.”

Roman Coliseum
1990 Author photo

Site of Roman Hippodrome
1990 Author photo

Walter Scheidel and Steven Freisen, who had quantified economic opportunity within the Roman Empire, wrote a paper in 2010 outlining their results.  They apparently concluded that the elite 1.5% of the population controlled 15 to 25% of the wealth.  Others have interpreted their figures and say that the top 1% controlled 16% of the wealth.  Rome had a pecking order, and for much of the time the "middling" Romans had a comfortable, but not extravagant or lavish lifestyle.  From this we can see that there were two Romes.  Below the elites was a class that made enough to survive, but "not enough to prosper."  Scheidel and Freisen have said that "the disproportionate visibility of this 'fortunate decile' must not let us forget the vast but-to us-inconspicuous majority that failed even to begin to share in the moderate amount of economic growth associated with large-scale formation in the ancient Mediterranean and its hinterlands."   The glory of Rome, as one reader of the Scheidle and Friesen study put it "is really just the rubble of the rich built on the backs of poor farmers and laborers, traces of whom all but have vanished."  The monuments of Rome built by an elite, with little credit to those who really made it possible.

Christian Catacombs under Rome
1990 Author photo

What does this mean for today?  In the United States today we have 1% of the population controlling 40% of the wealth, and a Gini coefficient slightly worse than what existed at the time of glory and grandeur of Rome.  The CIA, and World Bank are among institutions that use this method (ie Gini coefficient) to track income inequality.  The powerful elites of the U.S. have been made more so by the quantitative easing policy of the Federal Reserve for the last seven years that has led to an increase in stock prices, which of course most benefits large stockholders.  The financial elite of the nation, regardless of party control, come from or go to large banks, particularly Goldman Sachs.  A presidential candidate today was paid well above the middle six figures for a speech to Goldman Sachs.  Fifteen hundred years after the fall of Rome, the progressive and advanced United States has a greater income inequality than the dictatorship of Rome.  The financial and political elite today are to be viewed with caution every much as was the ruling class of ancient Rome, Rapa Nui and Maya.  Is economic disparity and social disenfranchisement a result of a maturing civilization, and bound to occur regardless of policy pursued?  The answer to that question will take a mind far greater than mine to discern.

Roman amphitheater in Gerasa, Jordan
Author photo, 2013

The three examples noted over the two posts show that power is controlled by an economic and/or political elite with self-interested decision making. Resource problems that arise (loss of trees, long drought, or reduced farmland fertility) can lead to downsizing of the society and even total societal collapse. Every society, or civilization, has a dependence upon resources, and as shortages occur adjustments also need to occur. The seeds of the collapse of the Roman Empire existed at what some historians regard as its peak period. Societies are complex organisms, and perhaps not one factor can be said to be the cause of the turn of fortunes. History shows us, however, that societies while complex are fragile and require proper management of resources and wealth in order to maintain stability, if not to allow for growth.  But, what happens is that the powerful and financial elite use their control to benefit themselves, thereby allowing the civilization to founder.  This happened in Rapa Nui, Maya and Rome.

Gerasa, Jordan Triumphal Arch built to commemorate the visit of
Roman Emporer Hadrian in 129-130 AD
My, how cities like their arches.
Author photo, 2013