1. 1
Will Peker
5842216
Joe Figliulo-Rossworm
Thursday 8AM
Diocletian’s Price Edict reveals that the Late Roman Empire’s economic
system resembled that of market economy in that transactions are made for private
gain. The Edict shows that many occupations were available in the Late Roman
Empire and that there was most likely a large wealth gap, which is expressed in the
prices section of the Edict where it lists wages. Diocletian’s viewpoint towards
merchants closely resembles that of the Literati in “Discourses on Salt and Iron” in
that they both believed merchants were innately evil and look only for personal gain
with no regard for others.
Diocletian was a Roman Emperor in the Late Roman Empire. He came to
power during the Crisis of the Third Century and quickly put an end to it. The Crisis
left the Roman economy in despair with extreme inflation. However this is not the
reason Diocletian cites for why he created his “Edict on Maximum Prices”.
Diocletian’s reasoning behind his Edict can be seen in his statement, “The
contribution of the whole world to support the armies falls to the abominable
profits of thieves” (Reader 225). In this statement Diocletian expresses that because
the merchants set such high prices, soldiers must use all of their salary in as little as
one purchase and because of this, all the money raised for the armies is being given
to the merchants therefore the merchants are taking more than they even know and

2. 2
driving prices constantly higher. Diocletian’s Edict set a maximum price for goods to
stop merchants from overcharging and stealing the nation’s wealth.
While the Edict gives no actual description of how the Roman economy was
set up, it hints at a complex economic structure that was very advanced for its time.
The Edict specifically states that the Roman Empire had merchants who buy, sell,
and trade goods for their own profit (Reader 224). An economy where people buy
and sell for their own profit is known as a market economy. In the Roman’s market
economy merchants look only for their own profit while ignoring the needs of
others and causing harm to the economy as a whole. Another characteristic of a
market economy that can be seen in the Edict is a form of currency. In the prices
section it specifically refers to using “denarii” as the main form of currency (Reader
226). Having an accepted medium of exchange as opposed to trading goods and
services for other goods and services shows a more advanced economic structure
than most other nations during this period in time. One more characteristic of a
nation with an advanced economic structure is the use of taxation. The Edict does
not use the word tax, however it hints towards taxation in the statement, “The
contribution of the whole world to support the armies” (Reader 225). This shows
that the government collected money from the people to use for it’s military, which
is known as taxing.
Many nations around the same time period as the Late Roman Empire
focused mostly on agriculture as their main occupation. However in an empire so
complex like the Roman Empire, many occupations existed. The Edict lists possible
occupations in the prices section. Some occupations given are farm laborer, stone

3. 3
mason, wall painter, figure painter, blacksmith, baker, brickmaker, shepherd,
notary, teacher, advocate, jurist, and soldier (Reader 226). The more education or
training a job requires the more it paid. When comparing the workers wages with
the price of goods, it reveals that the Late Roman Empire’s social classes had a large
wealth gap meaning that the poor are really poor and the rich are really rich. For an
average worker the cost of basic supplies such as wheat and barley exceeded their
day’s wage and the cost of nice clothing could exceed a year of pay (Reader 226). If
a single article of clothing exceeds an entire year of pay it is clearly out of the
question for that worker to purchase it. So if an average worker can’t afford it, who
can? The only jobs specifically stated in the Edict that pay enough for them to afford
the more expensive products are teachers, advocates, and jurists (Reader 226).
Because an average worker could barely afford necessities and very few could
afford accessories and there were few to no occupations in between, you can see
that there was a large wealth gap and clear division between the lower and upper
classes.
Diocletian makes his view towards merchants excruciatingly obvious. He
thought of all merchants as extremely greedy and focused on no one but themselves.
Diocletian exclaimed, “For who is so insensitive and so devoid of human feeling that
he cannot know, or rather, has not perceived, that in the commerce carried on in the
markets or involved in the daily life of cities immoderate prices are so widespread
that the uncurbed passion for gain is lessened neither by abundant supplies nor by
fruitful years” (Reader 224). Diocletian blamed the merchants for Rome’s economic
problems.

4. 4
A few hundred years earlier in China a debate over a monopoly on salt and
iron discussed pros and cons of merchants and trade. In “Discourses on Salt and
Iron” the Literati, or Chinese scholars, argued against a government created
monopoly on salt and iron, a liquor excise, and a system of equable marketing
because these things discourage people from rural occupations and encourage
people to seek different occupations (Reader 227). The Literati supported people
working in a rural setting rather than seeking profits by other means such as being a
merchant. The Literati viewed merchants poorly as they believed merchants and
trade led to greed and crime. His argument for this is that with everyone focused on
rural pursuits there is no way for someone to get ahead of another but when people
seek other occupations and are enticed with the opportunity for gain they will
become vicious (Reader 228). The Literati and Diocletian’s views towards
merchants are very similar. They were both against merchants. They both thought
merchants are extremely selfish and look out for no one but themselves. The only
difference is that the Literati wanted to get rid of merchants and have everyone
farm and Diocletian realized the necessity of merchants even though he is still
against them.
Diocletian’s Edict revealed that the Late Roman Empire’s economic system
resembled that of a market economy. It showed that there were diverse options for
work. It also showed that there was a clear division between the upper and lower
classes. The Edict expresses Diocletian’s negative view towards merchants which
was similar to the Literati’s view of merchants from “Discourses on Salt and Iron”.
Word Count: 1114