Today's selection -- from Money Changes
Everything by
William Goetzman. Virtually
all Roman Senators were moneylenders:
"Four years before Tiberius died, Rome was struck by a
financial crisis involving
mortgages and defaults. Unlike his profligate successor Caligula, Tiberius had
been conservative in public expenditures -- there was plenty of money in the
treasury. The financial crisis of 33 CE arose in the private sector, but it
ultimately needed to be resolved by the government through an intervention in
the credit markets. ...
"The crisis was described years later by historians
Tacitus, Dio, and Suetonius. It evidently began with the renewed
enforcement of laws enacted decades earlier by Julius Caesar regulating loans
and defining the terms of holding estates in Italy. Caesar's regulations were
themselves a response to a financial crisis that began in the 50s BCE
and came to a head after his march on Rome in 49 BCE. At that time, in
response to a dearth of credit and declining property values -- perhaps also
brought on by political uncertainty -- the Senate capped interest rates at 12%,
which evidently did not solve the credit crisis. Caesar took additional action
by allowing debt repayments in land at pre-crisis values; he also canceled
interest due on mortgages, forbade cash hoarding, and required lenders to hold
a portion of their wealth in real estate.
"These same remedies -- eighty years later -- were
applied to solve the credit crisis of 33 CE. The Julian law was invoked by
Roman tribunes (the representative of the people), but their action was likely
instigated at the behest of Tiberius. In what was evidently an attack on
senatorial finances, the tribunes lowered interest rates to 5% and closed
loopholes used to evade usury and landholding laws. The powerful senator Nerva
reportedly starved himself to death over the conflict with Tiberius and
the tribunes -- ostensibly because he was convinced that it was a disastrous
policy, but perhaps because he suffered catastrophic financial failure.
"According to Tacitus, virtually all senators were
moneylenders. Cut out of the commercial trades by law, lending was the primary
means by which senators maintained their wealth. Research by Roman historian
Nathan Rosenstein on the economics of the senatorial estates makes it clear
that, at lease for most senators, farming was just not profitable enough to
sustain them.
"The Senate requested and received from Tiberius an
eighteen-month reprieve from enforcing the law, but this grace period did not
work. What followed was a scarcity of money, as credit disappeared and
borrowers desperately tried to raise cash for repayment by selling estates. The
crisis in estate prices was likely exacerbated by the emperor liquidating the
confiscated estates of Sejanus's supporters.
Bass-relief showing money
changer at his bench
|
"The Senate next tried to prop up estate prices by
requiring three-quarters of all loan capital to be secured on land in Italy --
trying to force mortgage credit to landholders. This echoed the earlier Julian
proclamations -- but apparently did not work. Lenders simply withdrew from the
mortgage market, keeping capital on the sidelines until the uncertainty over
land values resolved. Tacitus describes the consequences:
many were utterly ruined. The destruction of private wealth
precipitated the fall of rank and reputation, till at last the emperor interposed his aid
by distributing throughout the banks a hundred million sesterces, and allowing
freedom to borrow without interest for three years, provided the borrower gave
security to the State in land to double the amount. Credit was thus restored,
and gradually private lenders were found.
No comments:
Post a Comment