Methods of pricing and price regulation in Roman Palestine in the third and fourth centuries.

• Author: Rosenfeld, Ben-Zion

While it is widely recognized that regulation of commercial prices was an important factor of economic life in the Roman Empire, little is known of the mechanisms through which this was carried out. The literature of the Jewish sages--particularly the Mishna, Tosefta, and Midrashim--provides useful information on price regulation in Roman Palestine. The religious authorities of the community contributed to the stabilization of the local economy through their interpretation of relevant Jewish laws.

INTRODUCTION

PRICING AND PRICE REGULATION are central to any economy and together form one of the most influential factors affecting market activity. (1) The Roman Empire provides no exception, and prices in markets and private commercial sites played an important role both in Italy and in the provinces. Pricing in the Empire, however, differed from place to place in accordance with local needs and circumstances. Sources concerning pricing are not numerous, (2) and any new information contributing to our knowledge and understanding of the character of the economy in the Roman period, especially concerning methods of pricing-about which we currently know very little-is consequently of great importance.

In this paper we shall attempt, with the aid of the literature of the Jewish sages, to present an organized account of a variety of aspects pertaining to pricing in Palestine, treating-among other things-various social laws. This literature is actually a mine of information on economic matters. Pricing is discussed with particular enthusiasm because of the relevance of the laws of the Jewish religion, especially those pertaining to interest. The sages were also actively engaged with the social and pragmatic aspects of various economic subjects, including the whole issue of pricing.

Our research on the literature of the Jewish sages has centered particularly on Tannaitic literature, particularly the Mishnah and the Tosefta, which were both composed in Palestine around A.D. 200-250 and reflect the conditions of that period. For details concerning the later part of the third century as well as the fourth century, we have availed ourselves of Talmudic literature dealing with Palestine, and of the Midrashim. (3) Thus we are able to examine the development of pricing techniques in this period and to compare them to contemporary methods of establishing prices elsewhere in the Roman world. (4)

We shall consider the complex system of pricing in the varied commercial settings in Palestine and how it fit into the wider context of the Roman world, with a view to shedding light on the economic structure of the Roman eastern Mediterranean basin.

PRICING IN THE ROMAN PERIOD

The simplest and most natural way of pricing everywhere in all periods is according to supply and demand. (5) But a completely open and free market upon which most of the population, rich and poor, depends could be catastrophic in an economic situation such as that which prevailed in the ancient period. (6) Limited production capacity, rudimentary and inefficient transport, and exposure to natural and man-made calamities all meant that the transition from surplus to shortage could be drastic and swift. Such events were common throughout the ancient world, (7) and Palestine in the Roman period was no exception. (8) There can be, therefore, a need for price regulation, and this is attainable by a combination of two measures:

1. Administrative control of prices, price freezes, or laws preserving "a fair price," all of which require the central or municipal government to supply officials or regulators.

2. Economic exploitation of supply and demand and the stabilization of prices through the regulation of the flow of goods to the market. This means delaying the arrival of surplus on the market in times of plenty, and gradually releasing stockpiles to the market as the need arises.

Administrative price regulation has been enforced from time immemorial by governmental, national, and municipal bodies. (9) Private commercial bodies may also carry out the stockpiling of goods. We shall begin by considering the first type of action and turn to the other later in the discussion.

In the Roman period, the imperial government interfered in market pricing only rarely, when it tried to impose maximum prices on various products. Such interference occurred only in moments of crisis, such as rampant inflation or the threat of revolt, in an attempt to stabilize markets and prevent overcharging. (10) However, even the most famous example, the Edict of Diocletian of 301, demonstrates the impracticality of this goal across the board. The multiplicity of price levels in the Empire, stemming from a variety of local conditions, could cause imperial governmental intervention to have the opposite of its intended effect in those places where prices had been low and could now rise steeply to the imposed ceiling. Furthermore, the artificial imposition of a price ceiling by the imperial authorities could lead to the disappearance of certain products from the market altogether. (11) Thus, local authorities best administered the stabilization of prices, while the imperial prices favored conditions in Rome or other major cities in the Empire. (12)

A law relating to the Jews demonstrates that the imperial government indeed authorized local bodies to fix prices. The imperial law decreed by Arcadius in 396 runs as follows: (13)

IMPP. ARCADIUS ET HONORIUS AA. AD IUDAEOS Nemo exterus religionis Iudacorum Iudaeis pretia statuet, cum venalia proponentur. Iustum est enim sua cuique committere. Itaque rectores provinciarum vobis nullum discussorem aut moderatorem esse concedent, Quad si quis sumere sibi curam praeter vos proceresque vestros audeat, eum velut aliena appetentem supplicio coercere festinent. D. III K. MART. CONSTANTINOPOLI ARCADIO IIII ET HONORIO III AA. CONSS.

THE TWO EMPERORS AND AUGUSTI ARCADIUS AND HONORIUS TO THE JEWS:

No outsider to the religion of the Jews shall establish prices for the Jews when merchandise is offered for sale, for it is just to assign to each man what is his own. Provincial governors shall now allow, therefore, a controller or a supervisor to be appointed over you. But if someone should dare to seize this office, except for you and your leaders, then they shall hasten to repress him with the penalty imposed on a usurper of another's property.

GIVEN ON THE THIRD DAY BEFORE THE CALENDS OF MARCH AT CONSTANTINOPLE, IN THE CONSULATE OF THE TWO AUGUSTI, ARCADIUS FOR THE FOURTH TIME AND HONORIUS FOR THE THIRD TIME.

Several conclusions may be drawn from this text: 1) a prohibition was in force against any non-Jewish body fixing prices for the Jews; 2) provincial governors could not appoint their own inspectors to supervise the prices of goods for the Jews; 3) authority was granted exclusively to the Jewish leadership. The law is addressed "to the Jews" and might be interpreted as binding on all parts of the Empire, but it is more likely to have been limited in its application to Palestine, the only place where there were markets run exclusively by Jews. Authority, therefore, is being granted to local leadership. It might be inferred that this authority is delegated to the central Jewish leader in Palestine, the Patriarch (Nasi). However, the Patriarch is not mentioned in this law, while he does appear in other laws of the fourth century relating to the Jewish leadership, where he is mentioned along with "heads" designated by a variety of terms such as majores and primates. The term proceres in the laws referring to the J ews in the Codex Justinianus is found only here. (14) It would appear, therefore, to refer to a type of leadership other than that of the Patriarch and the Jewish heads--a local leadership which, in keeping with the content of the law, would have dealt with local economic management. This latter term was indeed used mainly as a general appellation for leaders, or for leaders of a more professional character. This is the situation in the Codex Theodosianus itself in laws that do not refer to the Jews, (15) and in other places as well. (16) This conclusion also receives support from the multiplicity of prices attested for various goods in different places in Palestine. (17) The controllers or supervisors (discussorem aut moderatorem) were supposed to enforce prices, not determine them. They were subject to the regional administrative bodies that actually determined prices.

The law decreed at the end of the fourth century also reveals the antecedent state of affairs. Relations between the Jews and the government during that period were not as good as they had been in the previous centuries. It seems, therefore, that we are faced here with confirmation of a law or custom already in force in the third century. This law prevented deterioration in the authority of the Jews in economic matters. We may therefore conclude from its renewal that a similar situation was to be found elsewhere in the Empire as well, and that authority for pricing and price enforcement lay in the hands of local municipal governments, as also demonstrated by other sources. (18)

There is also the question of how supervision over the direct market prices between farmer or small producer and consumer could be carried out. In the period under discussion, most everyday consumer products, if not produced by the consumer himself, were obtainable from neighbors or other farmers, and it does not seem that it would have been either possible or worthwhile to supervise their prices. (19) Yet it is difficult to imagine that the fixed price was to be imposed only on the professional commercial market, while the unofficial market remained without supervision. Such a situation could easily have led to the complete destruction of the professional market, as a result of quality goods moving only through the private market.

The obvious conclusion is that supervision, which certainly began at the...