Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Gam3rBlake, post: 7310678, member: 115909&quot;]What do you mean I answered my own question?</p><p><br /></p><p>I’m sure a lot of the poorest of the poor did live day to day with no savings.</p><p><br /></p><p>But I’m sure there was also a “middle class” that could at least put away a Denarius a month in savings.</p><p><br /></p><p>Like I’m sure everyone wasn’t either dirt poor or exorbitantly wealthy. There had to be upper middle class Romans too.</p><p><br /></p><p>In fact in “Ab Urbe Condita” by Titus Livius (written in the 1st century AD) he mentions that the Romans did census taking and recorded every citizen’s total wealth/net worth.</p><p><br /></p><p>The richest of the rich became Patricians (“fathers”) and they had a net worth of 100,000+ asses.</p><p><br /></p><p>Then there was a second group that had a net worth of 75,000-100,000 asses.</p><p><br /></p><p>It goes on and on but the point is there were many Romans in the middle between not dirt poor but not as rich as Crassus. (see what I did there? <img src="styles/default/xenforo/clear.png" class="mceSmilieSprite mceSmilie2" alt=";)" unselectable="on" unselectable="on" />).</p><p><br /></p><p>Financial emergencies happened back then too (like say a tool breaks and a farmer needs to replace/repair it) so the middle class would probably have some sort of meager savings for such events no?[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in