Rome, Babylon, Egypt?
-
-
-
Vast majority of pop were farmers b/c avg productivity per capita was low; had to have significant component of pop in fields or everyone starved.
-
There was still a aristocratic, and "middle" class but I see how they just had money, and weren't really "technological"
-
In terms of proportion it was very small, and the levels of wealth inequality would be eyewatering if observed in modern context. Wealth was distributed on extremely steep log scale, aristocracy had absurd levels of cash compared to plebs.
-
Like the emperor literally owned Egypt, it was his personal property and he personally derived all revenue from what was the single greatest source of grain for the entire empire. Nothing comparable today.
-
*Roman emperor Even during the Republic, wealthy patricians held extremely significant fractions of all wealth in the nation, like Crassus was estimated to have equivalent wealth to the annual budget of the Roman govt
-
And if I understand the Aristocracy wasn't much more technologically advanced than everyone else.
-
Not hugely; they just had access to more costly stuff, like a pleb would never have been able to afford an armored breastplate, that was fancy shit for the tiny handful of aristos who would afford them. And typically if you could afford one you could afford an arbitrary number
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.