In the roman times did poor people live in different areas from the rich?

Question

In the roman times did poor people live in different areas from the rich?
Can i have detailed answers plz!

Answer 1

The lower class Romans (plebeians) lived in apartment houses, called flats, above or behind their shops. Even fairly well-to-do tradesmen might chose to live in an apartment-building compound over their store, with maybe renters on the upper stories. Their own apartments might be quite roomy, sanitary and pleasant, occasionally with running water. But others were not that nice.


In the apartment houses, or flats, an entire family (grandparents, parents, children) might all be crowded into one room, without running water. They had to haul their water in from public facilities. Fire was a very real threat because people were cooking meals in crowded quarters, and many of the flats were made of wood. They didn't have toilets. They had to use public latrines (toilets).

The upper class Romans (patricians) lived very differently. Their homes were single family homes, which in ancient Rome meant the great grandparents, grandparents, parents, and kids of one family lived in a home together. Homes were made, quite often, of brick with red tile roofs, with rooms arranged around a central courtyard.

The windows and balconies faced the courtyard, not the street, to keep homes safe from burglars. There were paintings on the walls and beautiful mosaics on the floor. There was very little furniture, and no carpeting. Wealthy Romans might have a house with a front door, bedrooms, an office, a kitchen, a dining room, a garden, a temple, an atrium, a toilet, and a private bath.


Here's a nice link to ancient houses. You can see how the rich and poor of ancient Rome lived.

http://www.furniturestyles.net/ancient/homes/roman-insulae.html

Answer 2

Some of the poor people in Roman times lived in a different part of the house in the servants quarters which were usually dirtier and more crammed than the rich Roman's quarters. Other poor people were bought and sold as commodities.

Answer 3

In London, the rich lived within the City walls and the poor just outside them. St. Bride's church is where it is, in Fleet Street ie just W of the wall's Lud Gate, because the original one was built in late-Roman times for the poor Celtic people who lived in that location.

The Glastonbury Lake Village gives an idea of how the poor lived in those days, in contrast to the villas of the rich.

Of course, slaves and servants often lived in their masters' mansions.

There is a find somewhere of a Roman bathhouse that had burnt down, and some prostitutes' bones were found in the roof -- a sign that the girls had lived there.... convenient for serving clients who came to bath.

Answer 4

Yes they did. Wealthy Romans had large elaborate villas while the poor lived in ghettos, much as they do today. Wealthy Romans frequently also had country villas which they occupied during the summer. They did so to escape the intolerable stench of over a million people living in Rome without adequate sewers or plumbing.

Answer 5

When in Rome do as Rome does. When in England do some archaeology and find that there is almost no difference between how the poor and the rich lived now as then. Do your own research and don't be boring the rest of us.

Answer 6

Yes their were different class's just like today the rich had a nice area while the poor got by any way they could.

Answer 7

It is all down to farmer and geography. Whilst you still have the hunter gatherer lifestyle everyone are involved in the gathering food so you don't get people in other professional/jobs. As soon as you have farming people get involved in other activities, writing, science, architecture, building, art etc. As producing food does not take 100% of the work force. The reason African for the most part has lagged behind European and Asian culture is two fold: 1) Technology and agricultural methods are show to pass far more quickly East to West than North to South. This is to to with similarities in climate on the same latitude. What works in Asian generally works in Europe and people migrate more East to West and vice-versa taking technology with them. The land mass of Africa and the Americas are North to South. Europe and Asia are East to West. 2) Africa does not have many native animals or crops that are conducive to farming. Zebras for example cannot be domesticated like horses.

Answer 8

yes. this is becuse like in all civilisation it is said to be better to live nearer the person/people in power. that is why most medival and later cities are circular as the have different layers according to power which was then equal to money. Rather like a target, with the king/head of state as bulls eye.
Most people have now realised that geographical relationship to power is not needed but it still occurs. As in the fact most head offices for large companys like to be situated in or around the capital city.

Answer 9

Yes. They lived in the slums of Rome away from the Seven Hills area.
Check out the link below for more info.

Answer 10

They would have been housed in different areas and most likely slaves to the rich.