Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Coulee

Plebes
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Coulee

  • Rank
    Tiro
  1. Coulee

    Treatment of conquered land and peoples

    OK, thanks a lot for your generous sharing of thoughts and information. It's been very helpful.
  2. Coulee

    Treatment of conquered land and peoples

    Again, thanks for your comments. If you have any references for their ideological emphasis on free will and self-determination, I'd love to have them. Also, your version of Roman "colonialism" seems to agree with how the archaeologist, Chris Gosden (2004), characterizes it. In terms of the land question, would it be safe to say that the Roman state was more concerned about "incorporation" of distant lands and peoples than transforming local economies and practices (e.g., land-use, land-tenure, etc.)? With an exception being areas chosen for latifundia and, to a lesser extent, areas settled by war veterans, who would be given estates? And would that mean that struggles over land such as the dispute between Cassius and Verginius over division of the land of the conquered Hernicians, and other practices leading to land consolidation among the wealthy, were more limited to areas nearer to Rome, rather than the far-flung areas of the empire? Also, what conceptual/legal categories did they have for land? I've heard about res publica and res communis, but were there others? And what might res communis actually have meant on-the-ground? Would it have meant leaving local lands alone? Or would it have allowed local lands under the category of res communis to be captured by any ambitious entrepreneur (general, soldier, etc.) who desired them? Sorry to bug you with all these questions, but if they're getting tiresome, maybe you can provide me with some references I can research on my own. Thanks a lot.
  3. Coulee

    Treatment of conquered land and peoples

    Thanks for your response. I must admit I'm a novice when it comes to things Roman, but I'm writing a book for which this issue is relevant (it's a "history from below" of a colonial situation in Africa). Writing such histories is challenging (due to the paucity of sources), especially for previous historical periods, but my main concern is how common people fared in the territories conquered by Rome -- i.e., could they keep their land, did land-use and land rights change, did local rural economies persevere and how did they change, etc. In addition to the information you provided, I know of the latifundia system as well as the practice of rewarding war veterans with grants of land and presume that there was considerable variation, according to time and place. But any information and references you (or anyone else) could provide will be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
  4. As the Roman state captured territory, under either the Republic or the Empire, in what situations did they confiscate the lands of the inhabitants and in what situations did they simply exact tribute from them?
×