1 Quantifying the Roman Economy: Integration, Growth, Decline?

Abstract

This chapter discusses the definitions and characteristics of the economic processes and trends in the Roman Empire, and outlines the methods by which quantification of data in written and archaeological sources can lead to a better understanding of economic integration, growth, and decline in the period c.100 BC to AD 350. These are then further analyzed in the context of a number of economic institutions and practices, including economic policy, monetization, trade, markets, commerce, investment, industrial production, technology, specialization of the labour force, and education. It suggests how we can identify a series of indicators of trends, which may be different in different regions, that can yield an idea of how the Roman economy compares with earlier and later periods of the classical world and with other cultures and empires.

The Roman Hinterland Project: Integrating Archaeological Field Surveys around Rome and Beyond

“…The trend tracks the pattern of increased economic activity and long-distance exchange between c. 200 BC and AD 200 familiar from a number of other proxy datasets (e.g. Bowman & Wilson, 2009;Jongman, 2014). Comparing the overall consumption trend to those derived from the three component datasets reveals notable variations.…”

Terra sigillata in southern Latium. The evidence from the Pontine Region Project, 1987-2014

“…Looking more closely into the contexts where terra sigillata was found, we may also address issues related to economic performance, another topic that has received ample attention in recent scholarship (Jongman 2017;Bowman & Wilson 2009). Archaeological proxy data suggests that in the first centuries BC and AD, population growth went hand in hand with economic growth (e.g.…”

“…Archaeological proxy data suggests that in the first centuries BC and AD, population growth went hand in hand with economic growth (e.g. Bowman & Wilson 2009;Jongman 2014). Whether the region saw both aggregate growth and per capita growth and, if so, who benefited from it (elites only or a larger segment of society), remains unclear .…”

A Historiography of the Study of the Roman Economy: Economic Growth, Development, and Neoliberalism

“…Naturally the description given above is a somewhat over-schematised picture, but while there are many who fall in between the two extremes outlined, the crucial fact remains that recent contributions to the debate have done little to alter the basic hegemonic structure of the discourse. Many archaeologists, for example, have simply joined the debate on one side or the other, and discussion has tended to centre on the correct use of this or that form of evidence, rather than on questioning the general validity of attempting to establish accurate measurements of economic performance in the first place, or on examining what the risks or benefits of asking such a question of the distant past might be (Bowman and Wilson 2009;Greene 1986;Harris 1993;Mattingly 2006a;Wilson 2009;. The fact of the matter is that the current debate over the scale of economic growth in antiquity could continue ad infinitum, without it ever being acknowledged that a significant transformation has taken place in which both groups, primitivists and modernists, have come to share some fundamental presuppositions about what economic history is for and how it should be carried out (Morley 2007: xiii, 7-9).…”