This articlepossibly containsoriginal research. There is lots of prose throughout the article without any citation. Pleaseimprove it byverifying the claims made and addinginline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed.(July 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Roman commerce was a major sector of theRoman economy during the later generations of theRepublic and throughout most of theimperial period. Fashions and trends inhistoriography and in popular culture have tended to neglect the economic basis of the empire in favor of thelingua franca ofLatin and the exploits of theRoman legions.^{[citation needed]} The language and the legions were supported by trade and were part of its backbone. The Romans were businessmen, and the longevity of their empire was caused by their commercialtrade.^{[citation needed]}

Whereas in theory members of theRoman Senate and their sons were restricted when engaging in trade,^[2] the members of theequestrian order were involved in businesses despite their upper-class values, which laid the emphasis on military pursuits and leisure activities.Plebeians and freedmen held shop or manned stalls at markets, and vast numbers ofslaves did most of the hard work. The slaves were themselves also the subject of commercial transactions. Probably because of their high proportion in society compared to that inClassical Greece, the reality of runaways, and theServile Wars and minor uprisings, they gave a distinct flavor to Roman commerce.^{[citation needed]}

The intricate, complex, and extensive accounting of Roman trade was conducted with counting boards and theRoman abacus. The abacus, which usedRoman numerals, was ideally suited to the counting ofRoman currency and tallying ofRoman measures.^{[citation needed]}

Thenegotiatores were in part bankers because theylent money on interest. They also bought and sold staples in bulk or did commerce in wholesale quantities of goods. Theargentarii acted as agents in public or private auctions, kept deposits of money for individuals, cashed cheques (prescriptiones) and served as moneychangers. In some instances theargentarii are considered a subset of thenegotiatores and in others as a group apart. Theargentarii sometimes did the same kind of work as themensarii, who were public bankers appointed by the state. They kept strict books, calledtabulae, which were treated as legal proof by the courts.^{[citation needed]}

TheMercatores were usuallyPlebeians orfreedmen. They were present in all the open-air markets or covered shops, manning stalls or hawking goods by the side of the road. They were also present near Roman military camps during campaigns. They sold food and clothing to the soldiers and paid cash for any booty coming from military activities.^{[citation needed]}

There is some information on the economy of Roman Palestine from Jewish sources of around the 3rd century AD. Itinerant pedlars (rochel) took spices and perfumes to the rural population.^[3] This suggests that the economic benefits of the Empire did reach, at least, the upper levels of the peasantry.

TheForum Cuppedinis inancient Rome was a market which offered general goods. At least four other large markets specialized in specific goods such ascattle,wine,fish and herbs and vegetables, but theRoman Forum drew the bulk of the traffic. All new cities, likeTimgad, were laid out according to anorthogonalgrid plan which facilitated transportation and commerce. These cities were connected by goodroads. Navigable rivers were extensively used and some canals were dug, but neither leave such clear archaeological traces as roads. Consequently, they tend to be underestimated. Maintaining peace was a major factor in the expansion of trade. All settlements—especially the smaller ones—could be located in economically rational positions. Before and after the Roman Empire, hilltop defensive positions were preferred for small settlements andpiracy made coastal settlement particularly hazardous for all but the largest cities.^{[citation needed]}

By the 1st century, the provinces of the Roman Empire were trading huge volumes of commodities to one another via sea routes. There was an increasing tendency for specialization, particularly in manufacturing, agriculture andmining. Some provinces specialized in producing certain types of goods, such as grain inEgypt andNorth Africa andwine and olive oil in Italy,Hispania, and Greece.^{[citation needed]}

Knowledge of theRoman economy is extremely patchy. The vast bulk of traded goods, being agricultural, normally leave no direct remains. Very exceptionally, as at Berenice, there is evidence of long-distance trade inblack pepper,almonds,hazelnuts,stone pine cones,walnuts,coconuts,apricots andpeaches besides the more expectedfigs,raisins anddates. The wine, olive oil andgarum (fermented fish sauce) trades were exceptional in leavingamphorae behind. There is a single reference of the Syrian export of kipi stiffquince jam ormarmalade to Rome.^[4][5]

Even before theRoman Republic, theRoman Kingdom was engaged in regular commerce using the riverTiber. Before thePunic Wars completely changed the nature of commerce in the Mediterranean, the Republic had important commercial exchanges withCarthage. It entered into several commercial and political agreements with its rival city in addition to engaging in simple retail trading. TheRoman Empire traded with theChinese (viaParthian and other intermediaries) over theSilk Road.^{[citation needed]}

Maritime archeology and ancientmanuscripts fromclassical antiquity show evidence of vast Roman commercial fleets. The most substantial remains from this commerce are the infrastructure remains of harbors, moles, warehouses and lighthouses at ports such asCivitavecchia,Ostia,Portus,Leptis Magna andCaesarea Maritima. At Rome itself,Monte Testaccio is a tribute to the scale of this commerce. As with mostRoman technology, the Roman seagoing commercial ships had no significant advances over Greek ships of the previous centuries, though the lead sheeting of hulls for protection seems to have been more common. The Romans used round hulled sailing ships.^{[citation needed]} Continuous Mediterranean "police" protection over several centuries was one of the main factors of success of Roman commerce, given thatRoman roads were designed more for feet or hooves – with most land trade moving by pack mule – than for wheels, and could not support the economical transport of goods over long distances. The Roman ships used would have been easy prey for pirates had it not been for the fleets ofliburna galleys andtriremes of the Romannavy.^{[citation needed]}

Bulky, low-value commodities, like grain and construction materials, were traded only by sea routes, since the cost of sea transportation was sixty times lower than land.^[6] Staple goods and commodities likecereals for makingbread andpapyrus scrolls for book production were imported fromPtolemaic Egypt to Italy in a continuous fashion.

The trade over theIndian Ocean blossomed in the 1st and 2nd century AD. The sailors made use of themonsoon to cross the ocean from the ports ofBerenice,Leukos Limen^[7] andMyos Hormos on theRed Sea coast ofRoman Egypt to the ports ofMuziris and Nelkynda in theMalabar Coast. The main trading partners in southern India were theTamil dynasties of thePandyas,Cholas andCheras. Many Roman artifacts have been found in India; for example, at the archaeological site ofArikamedu, inPuducherry. Meticulous descriptions of the ports and items of trade around the Indian Ocean can be found in the Greek workPeriplus of the Erythraean Sea (see article onIndo-Roman trade).^{[citation needed]}

A standardamphora, theamphora capitolina, was kept in the temple of Jupiter on theCapitoline Hill in Rome, so that others could be compared to it. TheRoman system of measurement was built on theGreek system with Egyptian influences. Much of it was based on weight. The Roman units were accurate and well documented. Distances were measured, and systematically inscribed on stone by agents of the government.^{[citation needed]}

A fairly standard and fairly stable and abundant currency, at least up to circa 200 AD, did much to facilitate trade. (Egypt had its own currency in this period and some provincial cities also issued their own coins.)^{[citation needed]}

Alexander the Great had conquered as far as India, and the Roman godBacchus was also said to have journeyed there. The Far East, like sub-Saharan Africa, was a mysterious land to the Romans.^{[citation needed]}

There was an Indian inAugustus's retinue(Plut. Alex. 69.9), and he received embassies from India(Res Gestae, 31); one which met him in Spain in 25 BC, and one at Samos in 20 BC.

The trade over theIndian Ocean blossomed in the 1st and 2nd century AD. The sailors made use of themonsoon to cross the ocean from the ports ofBerenice, Leulos Limen andMyos Hormos on theRed Sea coast ofRoman Egypt to the ports ofMuziris and Nelkynda on theMalabar coast.^[8][9] The main trading partners in southern India were theTamil dynasties of thePandyas,Cholas andCheras. Meticulous descriptions of the ports and items of trade around the Indian Ocean can be found in the GreekPeriplus of the Erythraean Sea. In Latin texts, the term Indians (Indi) designated all Asians, Indian and beyond.

The main articles imported from India were spices such as pepper, cardamom, cloves, cinnamon, sandal wood and gems such as pearls, rubies, diamonds, emeralds and ivory. In exchange the Romans traded silver and gold. Hoards of Roman coins have been found in southern India during the history of Roman-India trade. Roman objects have been found in India in the seaside port city ofArikamedu, which was one of the trade centers.^[10]

Pomponius Mela argued for the existence ofNortheast Passage through the northward strait out of theCaspian Sea (which in Antiquity was usually thought to be open toOceanus in the north).^[11]

There is suggestive archaeological evidence that Roman traders were present inSoutheast Asia, which was roughly mapped out byPtolemy in hisGeography where he labelled the land bordering theMagnus Sinus (i.e., theGulf of Thailand andSouth China Sea) as theSinae.^[13] Their port city of "Cattigara", lying beyond theGolden Chersonese (Malay Peninsula) where a Greek sailor named Alexander allegedly visited, was quite possibly the ancient settlement atOc Eo,Vietnam, where Roman artefacts from theAntonine period such asmedallions from the reigns ofAntoninus Pius (r. 138–161) andMarcus Aurelius (r. 161–180) have been found.[14] An event recorded inthe ChineseWeilue andBook of Later Han for the year 166 seems directly connected to this activity, since these texts claim thatan embassy from "Daqin" (i.e., the Roman Empire) sent by their ruler "An Dun" (Chinese: 安敦; i.e., either Antoninus Pius or Marcus Aurelius) landed in thesouthern province ofJiaozhi (i.e., northern Vietnam) and presented tributary gifts to the Chinese rulerEmperor Huan of Han.^[15]Rafe de Crespigny andWarwick Ball contend that these were most likely Roman merchants, not official diplomats sent by Marcus Aurelius (given the absence of this event in Roman sources).^[16][17]

Despite two other Roman embassies recorded in Chinese sources for the 3rd century and several more by the laterByzantine Empire (Chinese: 拂菻;Pinyin:Fú lǐn),^[15][17] only sixteen Roman coins from the reigns ofTiberius (r. 14–37 AD) toAurelian (r. 270–275 AD) have been found in China atXi'an that pre-date the greater amount of Eastern Roman (i.e., Byzantine) coins from the 4th century onwards.^[18][19] Yet this is also dwarfed by the amount of Roman coins found in India, which would suggest that this was the region where the Romans purchased most of their Chinese silk.^[18] For that matter, thespice trade remained more important to theRoman economy than the silk one.^[20]

From the 3rd century a Chinese text, theWeilüe, describes the products of the Roman Empire and the routes to it.^[21]

Mercury, who was originally only the god of themercatores and thegrain trade^{[citation needed]} eventually became the god of all who were involved in commercial activities. On theMercuralia on May 14, a Roman merchant would do the proper rituals of devotion to Mercury and beseech the god to remove from him and from his belongings the guilt coming from all the cheating he had done to his customers and suppliers.^{[citation needed]}

WhileLivy makes reference to theLex Claudia (218 BC) restricting senators and sons of senators from owning a ship with greater than 300 amphorae capacity (about seven tons), they were still undoubtedly partaking in trade asCicero mentions this law when attackingVerres, although he makes no move to charge him.^[22]

Senators were still allowed to own and make use of ships under the size restriction, Cato when advising where to build a farm specifically mentions to have it built near an accessible river, road or port to allow transport of goods^[23] which is in direct conflict to Livy's assertion that all profit made through trade by a senator was dishonorable.^[24] Senators often utilized free and enslaved agents as a loophole to legal restrictions, thereby allowing themselves to diversify their sources of income.^[25]

That is not to say that the acquisition of wealth was not to be desired, Pliny notes that a Roman man should by honorable means acquire a large fortune^[26] and Polybius draws a comparison between the attitudes of Carthage and Rome towards profit from trade.^[27] Thus starts the confusion in the role of the elite in trade as Terence writes that there is nothing wrong with large scale trade; it is in fact completely honorable and legitimate to import large quantities of product from around the world especially if it happens to lead to a successful trader buying land and investing in Roman agriculture; what is dishonorable is trade on a small scale.^[28] Small trade is again shown as vulgar byTacitus as he describes the involvement ofSempronius Gracchus in petty trade.^[29]

Cato himself was involved with trade, although he himself cautioned against it as it was a risky occupation,^[30] perhaps this was part of the reasoning to keep senators excluded from the trade business, as if they had a severe misfortune with trading they could fall below the financial threshold of being a senator, whereas comparatively land owning was a far safer investment. Plutarch describes Cato's involvement in trade in great detail, depicting how he would use a proxy (a freedman by the name of Quintio) to run his business through a group of fifty other men.^[31]

The restriction on senators trading was itself passed initially through the tribune of the plebeians, a class of people who the restrictions would not apply to. It is suspected that this reform could have been the equites and other wealthy merchants trying to muscle the senators out from the rapidly expanding trade business.^{[citation needed]}

The majority of the people of the Roman Empire were living in rural areas, with a small part of the population engaged in commerce being much poorer than the elite. The industrial output was quite low, due to the fact that the poor majority could not pay for the products. Technological advance was hampered by this fact. Urbanization in the western part of the empire was also limited. Slaves accounting for most of the means of industrial output, rather than technology.^[32]

• Roman Britain: Trade
• Roman currency
• Roman finance
• Slavery in Ancient Rome

• Bowman, Alan K., and Andrew Wilson.Quantifying the Roman Economy: Methods and Problems. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
• Callataÿ, François de.Quantifying the Greco-Roman Economy and Beyond. Bari: Edipuglia, 2014.
• Duncan-Jones, Richard.Structure and Scale In the Roman Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
• Garnsey, Peter, and Richard P. Saller.The Roman Empire: Economy, Society and Culture. 2nd edition. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2015.
• Greene, Kevin.The Archaeology of the Roman Economy. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1986.
• Jones, A. H. M.The Roman Economy: Studies In Ancient Economic and Administrative History. Oxford: Blackwell, 1974.
• Lewit, Tamara.Agricultural Production In the Roman Economy, A.D. 200-400. Oxford: Tempus Reparatum, 1991.
• Peacock, D. P. S., and D. F. Williams.Amphorae and the Roman Economy: An Introductory Guide. London: Longman, 1986.
• Russell, Ben.The Economics of the Roman Stone Trade. 1st edition. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.
• Scheidel, Walter.The Cambridge Companion to the Roman Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
• Scheidel, Walter, Richard P. Saller, and Ian Morris.The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
• Temin, Peter.The Roman Market Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2013.
• Tomber, R.Indo-Roman Trade: From Pots to Pepper. London: Duckworth, 2008.
• Vrba, Eric Michael.Ancient German Identity In the Shadow of the Roman Empire: The Impact of Roman Trade and Contact Along the Middle Danube Frontier, 10 BC - AD 166. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2008.
• Warnking, Pascal (2015).Der römische Seehandel in seiner Blütezeit: Rahmenbedingungen, Seerouten, Wirtschaftlichkeit. Rahden/Westf: Verlag Marie Leidorf,ISBN 978-3-86757-264-4.

• The Romano-British Amphora Trade to A.D. 43 An Overview
• Ancient Roman Currency and Economy

• Economy of ancient Rome
• Foreign relations of ancient Rome
• Economic history of Italy

• All articles with dead external links
• Articles with dead external links from July 2016
• Webarchive template wayback links
• Articles with short description
• Short description matches Wikidata
• Articles that may contain original research from July 2023
• All articles that may contain original research
• All articles with unsourced statements
• Articles with unsourced statements from July 2023
• Articles with unsourced statements from March 2009
• Articles with unsourced statements from August 2021