Roman law and Rome as a megaorganism
Article Abstract:
The Roman legal system became more dependent on fixed principles toward the end of the history of the empire. Christianity was influential in bringing about this change since the religion had a tendency to emphasize set rules of behavior. The organizational structure of the Christian Church also influenced the Roman legal system. The eastern empire continued to survive and it is worth examining the organizational structure which helped prolong its survival.
Publication Name: Journal of Institutional & Theoretical Economics
Subject: Economics
ISSN: 0932-4569
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Megaorganisation in Antiquity: the Roman Empire
Article Abstract:
The Roman Empire was a large organization which included prosperous areas and enjoyed some stability. The empire was also affected by famines, maladministration, and military force used against uprisings. During the 3rd century there were pressures on the empire from outside which exacerbated internal conflict such as different interests of the elite and the other inhabitants of empire. State intervention increased in response to the problems.
Publication Name: Journal of Institutional & Theoretical Economics
Subject: Economics
ISSN: 0932-4569
Year: 1995
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: The evolution of money as a medium of exchange. Perfect competition in the continuous assignment model. Evolution and market competition
- Abstracts: Economic achievements and benefits. Strategy of integration, future challenges. Public policy and private initiative in the Middle East/North Africa: profound changes in the making
- Abstracts: Foreign exchange market efficiency and structural instability: evidence from Taiwan. The black market exchange rate and demand for money in Iran
- Abstracts: Wage negotiations under two-sided incomplete information with the possibility of side contracts. James Watt as intellectual monopolist: comment on Boldrin and Levine