This post is a real hot mess of literary citations. Read on only if you dare.
—
Why did so many Greek communities end up in debt to powerful Romans?
No word here about the creditors, but we see that Sulla’s own need for funding for his march on Rome is a key component. Even if the poleis are borrowing from fellow Greeks at the origin they are still entering debt to accommodate Roman leadership.
Now my current project joins up with my last one on the 80s BCE (Forthcoming in proceedings of the RACOM conference):
The historiographer in me is just delighted with how Appian seamlessly draws us from the Social War and the Roman debt crisis in the aftermath into the violence between Marius and Sulla over the Mithridatic War and all that follows. The murder of Asellio filled with tragedy and pathos and questions of who is right and wrong and the agency of unnamed forces divided between creditors and debtors is a beautiful construct. Letting the reader engage and empathize and feel some sense of understanding of the contentions let civil war erupt, but frankly that isn’t today’s problem.
State interference with interest rates didn’t work but was desired. The state also has no will to punish creditors for protecting their interests (pun intended with violence).
Let’s point out that we don’t know how the 12% APR rule was enforced OR to what types of loans it applied. We do know from Cicero’s letter that the 4% = 48% APR attempted to be backed by and SC for Salamis’ debts to Brutus was considered beyond the pale.
The Lex Valeria of 86 was passed by the consul suffectus L. Valerius Flaccus (the same man who lost his life in the mutiny of Fimbria later that year; this law allowed debts to be repaid as in full with only a quarter of the amount owed. Sources in same older blog post.
[At this point I’ve lost a mass of work thanks to a browser crash…].
I cannot re construct all my notes but here are the clippings
Highlights of above clippings:
Not loaning at interest: Augustus, Manlius, and Atticus
Debt shennanigans in Rome (Caelius’ legislation) and Provinces (Scipio et al) c. 48 BCE
4 century Livy on interest rates and debt relief
193 BCE attempts to get around regulation to charge higher interest
—
Dio 41.37 ‘restoration’ motives questioned…
Lucan – Debt associated with Bribery!
Look again at Cic. Par. Sto. VI on the nature of wealth because of allusions to Crassus and good vs. bad ways of making money. usury is bad. tax collecting good.
Taking state funds and then using them to give out loans. Taking bribes to allievate debt burden of foreigners to other Romans:
Problem of extorting Provincials:
Concordia rests on generosity and gratitude: interest on loans removes gratitude.
The endebted war hero without a name x2!
1% rate x2!
Cato throws the money lenders out of Sardinia
Forfeit property rather than keep a creditor waiting! Lots also in Catiline about this
Selling provincial assets to settle bills in Rome and/or borrowing to instead:
Cic. Att. 8.7, Feb 49
Cic. Att. 7.3.7, Dec 50
Tact. Ann. 6.16, 33 CE
Liv Mariah Yarrow 