I think it's fair to argue than using modern value for goods that you can produce more efficiently thanks to the availability of cheap energy and phosphate is not really fair.
750 sheeps or 1200 gallons of olive oil were certainly worth a fortune at the time, and owning that much would probably have made you a very weathly person when owning 300K USD today does not.
> and owning that much would probably have made you a very weathly person when owning 300K USD today does not.
I guess it depends on whether we want to measure relative wealth to the rest of the society or what can you actually buy with that money which would probably change the valuation 10-100+ times.
This applies to goods rather than labor to a much higher degree. Permanently owning the labour of 10 people working 16 hours per days is worth a lot more today than 10 slaves back then.
> This applies to goods rather than labor to a much higher degree. Permanently owning the labour of 10 people working 16 hours per days is worth a lot more today than 10 slaves back then.
Yes, but that's also because of the productivity increase linked to the cheap energy and phosphate supply brought by fossil fuels.
If cheap energy stop being available and human labour become again the main driver of economic output, you can bet that slavery will soon come back in fashion...
Itβs a bit of a tangent, but this reminds me of the Great Canadian Maple Syrup Heist[1] which is a good example of food commodity wealth in modern times.
750 sheeps or 1200 gallons of olive oil were certainly worth a fortune at the time, and owning that much would probably have made you a very weathly person when owning 300K USD today does not.