3 ms·

Something that was being produced and exported from Mediterranean was jewels. At least in China the jewels were mostly jade based, any other kind of complicated

Something that was being produced and exported from Mediterranean was jewels. At least in China the jewels were mostly jade based, any other kind of complicated jewelry was usually imported, and some of the most complicated ones, like those that were composed from layers of metal and glass, were being produced in the Roman Empire. India imported wine, which is a commodity that can survive transport and time quite well. From your quoted piece you deduce that the outflow of wealth and the disproportionate trade that most likely caused it was because of the poor selection of the trade-able goods made in the Mediterranean, but I think that it was because the Roman Empire was rich and the other markets - not so much (or at least not rich enough as markets to worth bearing the inherent risks of trade).

douche 11y ago
India and China produced just about everything locally that the West could export, and without having to ship it halfway around the world. Generally, they also produced higher quality manufactured goods, up until the Industrial Revolution. They also had botanical products that didn't grow in Europe, or were state secrets (like serriculture), which were desirable. Until the BEIC hooked a sizable part of southern China on opium, about the only reliable trade good was cold, hard cash. It's kind of hilarious to read through the annals of the British East India Company[1], for example. On their initial expeditions, they loaded ships full of wool, English broadcloth, leather, and other kinds of trade goods that they might shuttle around the Baltic Sea trade. When they got to Malabar or Indonesia, they realized these trade goods were basically worthless - on a couple of expeditions they were lucky enough to capture Spanish or Portuguese ships loaded with Indian cotton goods that it turned out could be traded for peppercorns or nutmegs, on others they had to use what little gold and silver they were allowed to ship. The silk, ceramic and tea trade to China vacuumed up a huge percentage of the output of the Spanish New World silver and gold mines. So much Peruvian silver came into Ming and Qing China that it wrecked the conversion rates between gold, silver and cash currency, and much of the mercantilist economic studies of the period were focused on finding ways to get the balance of trade to result in specie coming into, e.g England, rather than going out. I enjoy that Pliny quote, because it highlights the same problems of international trade in the Roman Republic that the various East India companies experienced. [1] https://archive.org/details/annalshonorable03brucgoog https://archive.org/details/annalshonorable03brucgoog
- restalis 11y ago
  "India and China produced just about everything locally that the West could export" Before I begin, let me say that "the West" is a very political term of the actual times and we were talking about the ancient times. Let's try to keep our heads lucid by avoiding sensitive topics, by avoiding blame casting (related to opium), and other such things. Now, pretty much every community in the ancient times "produced just about everything locally", at least everything they needed. Trade usually happens because of cultural differences (even when these differences are induced by other natural factors, like climate), and it just happened that the cultures in question (Roman, Indian, and Chinese) were different enough. Who were the usual consumers of the imported goods? Not the average Joes, mind you! They were the ones that: first - were open to appreciate foreign things for any reason (exotic tastes, cosmopolitan nature, etc.), and second - could afford to! You may assume here that for various reasons the Indian and Chinese high class could have been more closed and not so interested in foreign products, preferring only the good ol' local produced things, but I don't. I don't want to think that their nature was somehow lesser in this regard (because I like to consider human to be equals about that), and I prefer to assume that even if they wanted to, their collective potential that formed the market depth was not deep enough. India accepted the Roman gold. That's because Rome happened to have it (from its conquests, mostly), whereas India did not so much! A steep difference of their historical evolution that ultimately shaped their cultures and trade, you see? Another kind of cultural difference between Roman Empire and China shaped the trade between them. Who were the consumers of luxury goods in Roman Empire? Women, mostly! Did women in China have the same leeway in shopping spree? No! That's because unlike the women in the Roman Empire, which enjoyed equal social status with men, and many other things, women in ancient China bared a lower social status in comparison! So, another big cultural difference that heavily shaped the nature of commerce between Roman Empire and China. I'm glad to enlighten, thank you!
  - douche 11y ago
    If we check the politics at the door and just talk about history, the facts don't change. The Mediterranean possessed few unique trade goods that were practical for long-distance trade. There are copper and tin mines in China and India. You can as easily get ivory from Indian elephants as North African ones. Tyrian purple appears to not have been very popular in areas that produced indigo. Shipping Egyptian wheat doesn't make a great deal of sense when you are already producing surpluses in the Indus, Yangtze and Yellow river valleys. Chinese porcelain was comparable, if not superior to Attic pottery. It would be insanely extravagant to import Italian or Greek marble when you have to transship it across the Sinai peninsula. Garum was a massively important Roman luxury good, but you can make fermented fish sauce elsewhere, or use soy-sauce to get your MSG. In an era of astronomically high transport costs, only the rarest, highest-value goods made any sense at all to transport long distances. So there were raw goods that the Roman elites desired that could not be locally sourced, because they were, by geographical accident, only produced in other places. Elites in other places happened to have these goods locally, and there was very little that was uniquely produced in the Mediterranean that could be exchanged for those goods. So they used hard-currency, because everybody likes shiny metal. The Chinese opium trade was a huge deal, because at the time, the American precious metal mines were just about played out, and revolution throughout the old Spanish colonies were further disrupting supply. Although the heydey of importing opium into China didn't last very long - within a couple of decades, China was producing more locally grown opium poppies than were ever imported.

douche 11y ago

India and China produced just about everything locally that the West could export, and without having to ship it halfway around the world. Generally, they also produced higher quality manufactured goods, up until the Industrial Revolution. They also had botanical products that didn't grow in Europe, or were state secrets (like serriculture), which were desirable. Until the BEIC hooked a sizable part of southern China on opium, about the only reliable trade good was cold, hard cash. It's kind of hilarious to read through the annals of the British East India Company[1], for example. On their initial expeditions, they loaded ships full of wool, English broadcloth, leather, and other kinds of trade goods that they might shuttle around the Baltic Sea trade. When they got to Malabar or Indonesia, they realized these trade goods were basically worthless - on a couple of expeditions they were lucky enough to capture Spanish or Portuguese ships loaded with Indian cotton goods that it turned out could be traded for peppercorns or nutmegs, on others they had to use what little gold and silver they were allowed to ship. The silk, ceramic and tea trade to China vacuumed up a huge percentage of the output of the Spanish New World silver and gold mines. So much Peruvian silver came into Ming and Qing China that it wrecked the conversion rates between gold, silver and cash currency, and much of the mercantilist economic studies of the period were focused on finding ways to get the balance of trade to result in specie coming into, e.g England, rather than going out. I enjoy that Pliny quote, because it highlights the same problems of international trade in the Roman Republic that the various East India companies experienced. [1] https://archive.org/details/annalshonorable03brucgoog https://archive.org/details/annalshonorable03brucgoog

restalis 11y ago
"India and China produced just about everything locally that the West could export" Before I begin, let me say that "the West" is a very political term of the actual times and we were talking about the ancient times. Let's try to keep our heads lucid by avoiding sensitive topics, by avoiding blame casting (related to opium), and other such things. Now, pretty much every community in the ancient times "produced just about everything locally", at least everything they needed. Trade usually happens because of cultural differences (even when these differences are induced by other natural factors, like climate), and it just happened that the cultures in question (Roman, Indian, and Chinese) were different enough. Who were the usual consumers of the imported goods? Not the average Joes, mind you! They were the ones that: first - were open to appreciate foreign things for any reason (exotic tastes, cosmopolitan nature, etc.), and second - could afford to! You may assume here that for various reasons the Indian and Chinese high class could have been more closed and not so interested in foreign products, preferring only the good ol' local produced things, but I don't. I don't want to think that their nature was somehow lesser in this regard (because I like to consider human to be equals about that), and I prefer to assume that even if they wanted to, their collective potential that formed the market depth was not deep enough. India accepted the Roman gold. That's because Rome happened to have it (from its conquests, mostly), whereas India did not so much! A steep difference of their historical evolution that ultimately shaped their cultures and trade, you see? Another kind of cultural difference between Roman Empire and China shaped the trade between them. Who were the consumers of luxury goods in Roman Empire? Women, mostly! Did women in China have the same leeway in shopping spree? No! That's because unlike the women in the Roman Empire, which enjoyed equal social status with men, and many other things, women in ancient China bared a lower social status in comparison! So, another big cultural difference that heavily shaped the nature of commerce between Roman Empire and China. I'm glad to enlighten, thank you!
- douche 11y ago
  If we check the politics at the door and just talk about history, the facts don't change. The Mediterranean possessed few unique trade goods that were practical for long-distance trade. There are copper and tin mines in China and India. You can as easily get ivory from Indian elephants as North African ones. Tyrian purple appears to not have been very popular in areas that produced indigo. Shipping Egyptian wheat doesn't make a great deal of sense when you are already producing surpluses in the Indus, Yangtze and Yellow river valleys. Chinese porcelain was comparable, if not superior to Attic pottery. It would be insanely extravagant to import Italian or Greek marble when you have to transship it across the Sinai peninsula. Garum was a massively important Roman luxury good, but you can make fermented fish sauce elsewhere, or use soy-sauce to get your MSG. In an era of astronomically high transport costs, only the rarest, highest-value goods made any sense at all to transport long distances. So there were raw goods that the Roman elites desired that could not be locally sourced, because they were, by geographical accident, only produced in other places. Elites in other places happened to have these goods locally, and there was very little that was uniquely produced in the Mediterranean that could be exchanged for those goods. So they used hard-currency, because everybody likes shiny metal. The Chinese opium trade was a huge deal, because at the time, the American precious metal mines were just about played out, and revolution throughout the old Spanish colonies were further disrupting supply. Although the heydey of importing opium into China didn't last very long - within a couple of decades, China was producing more locally grown opium poppies than were ever imported.