See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/288670066

Economy, Roman

Chapter · January 2014

DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-0465-2_1471

CITATIONS READS

0 275

1 author:

Miko Flohr
Leiden University
64 PUBLICATIONS   59 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Building Tabernae - how commercial investment changed the cities of Roman Italy (200BCE-300CE) View project

Inequality and Society in the Roman World View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Miko Flohr on 01 November 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 
E 2338 Economy, Roman
 
and related disciplines, with the aim to enhance GSELL, S. 1893. Recherches archéologiques en Algérie.
over the long term (from prehistory to the end of Paris: E. Leroux.
VALLET, G., F. VILLARD & P. AUBERSON. (ed.) 1983-.
the Middle Ages) an understanding of ancient Megara Hyblaea. Rome: École française de Rome.
societies of the Mediterranean basin, while con- VILLEDIEU, F. 1997-2007. La Vigna Barberini (Roma
tributing to the research training of young archae- antica 3, 6). 2 v. Rome: École française de Rome.
ologists and widely disseminating its findings in  
publications or on its website (www.efrome.it). Further Reading
  FERNIQUE, E. 1880. De Regione Marsorum, thesim
proponebat Facultati litterarum Parisiensi ad gradum
  doctoris promovendus Emmanuel Fernique. Paris: E.
Cross-References Thorin.
 
▶ American Academy in Rome  
▶ Archaeology and Anthropology  
▶ Architecture, Roman Economy, Roman
▶ Archival Research and Historical Archaeology  
▶ Central Italy: Pre-Roman and Archaic Miko Flohr
Ceramics Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
▶ Ceramics, Ancient Greek  
▶ Ceramics, Roman Imperial  
▶ Ceramics: Roman Republican and Early Introduction and Definition
Principate  
▶ Deutsches Archäologisches Institut (DAI), The Roman economy was the economic system
Rome Department created by the geographical expansion of the
▶ Economy, Roman political power of Rome over the Mediterranean
▶ Epigraphy, Imperial Latin and Europe between the third-century BCE and
▶ Epigraphy, Latin: Early Through Late the first-century CE and maintained during the
Republican first centuries of our era until its gradual decline
▶ Italy: Medieval Archaeology in late antiquity. The Roman economy can be
▶ Latium Vetus, Latium Adjectum seen as the acme of a long period of technological
▶ North Africa, Roman development and economic growth in the
▶ North Africa: Historical Archaeology Mediterranean, which began in the early first
▶ Numismatics, Roman Imperial millennium BCE and led to population increase,
▶ Numismatics, Roman Republican intensification of land use, economic and political
▶ Religion, Italo-Roman, Archaeology of integration, and urbanization. Its decline in late
▶ Survey Archaeology in the Roman World antiquity marks the beginning of a long period of
 
transformation and urban regression in Europe as
 
  well as in large parts of the Mediterranean.
References  
   
BEN ABED BEN KHADER, A. & M. GRIESHEIMER. 2004. La Historical Background
nécropole de Pupput, I. Rome: Ecole française de  
Rome.
Academic History
BEN ABED-BEN KHADER, A., M. FIXOT, M. BONIFAY &
S. ROUCOLE. 2004. Sidi Jdidi I. La basilique sud. The history, structure, and performance of the
Rome: Ecole française de Rome. Roman economy have been hotly debated issues
BLOCH, R. 1972. Recherches archéologiques en territoire since the late nineteenth century. Debate about
volsinien de la protohistoire à la civilisation étrusque.
the Roman economy has long been characterized
Paris: De Boccard.
FIXOT, M. 2011. Sidi Jdidi. II. Le groupe episcopal. Rome: by a strong emphasis on the differences or simi-
Ecole française de Rome. larities between the Roman economy and the

Economy, Roman
economy of the industrializing world and by an
opposition between optimists, who are inclined to
emphasize Roman achievement, and pessimists,
who are inclined to emphasize Roman
shortcomings.
The debate originated in late nineteenth-
century Europe, with a big controversy between
Karl Bücher and Eduard Meyer being a first
major milestone. Bü cher argued that the ancient
economy was a household economy character-
ized by self-sufficiency. Meyer attacked this
view and maintained that the Roman Empire
saw the growth of “big business” and a full
development of capitalism.
In the core decades of the twentieth century,
a “modernist” paradigm dominated the field.
It was most forcefully articulated by Mikhael
Rostovtzeff, who argued that the Roman
economy was structurally similar to the modern
economy but only differed in that it operated
on a much smaller scale. Romans had
well-developed entrepreneurial mentalities,
there was considerable long-distance trade, and
the economic fate of cities depended on
the degree to which they were able to develop
large-scale, export-oriented production.
The 1970s saw a true paradigm shift, basically
caused by the work of Moses Finley, who was
strongly influenced by both the work of Max
Weber and Karl Polanyi and who argued that
the ancient economy was, in general, a primitive
affair. Long-distance trade was restricted to
luxury goods, while bulk demand was satisfied
through locally produced wares. Moreover,
cultural and societal structures impeded large-
scale elite investment in manufacturing and held
back economic growth. Cities were centers of
consumption (Weberian “consumer cities”) and
display whose economic fate depended on the
presence of a landowning elite, and not on
market-oriented export production.
Finley’s work proved highly provocative and
was subsequently refined, adapted, and contested.
Especially in the 1980s and 1990s, Finley’s ideas
were at the center of a fierce academic debate
between “modernists” and “primitivists” – with
archaeologists generally opting for the modernist
side of the debate. Key issues in the debate were
2339 E
the economic role of cities, the existence of
long-distance trade, and the presence or absence
of technological development.
After the turn of the millennium, the debate
moved beyond the Finleyan paradigm and has
begun to explore the relative position of the
Roman economy compared to other preindustrial
economies, particularly Medieval and Early
Modern Europe. In the debate, there is an
increasing emphasis on historical change and,
particularly, economic growth, issues that had
traditionally been absent from both primitivist
and modernist accounts of the Roman economy.
 
Evidence
Debates about the Roman economy are based on
a variety of datasets that can be divided into two
groups: texts and material remains. There are
three groups of textual sources: literary texts,
inscriptions, and documentary texts. Roman
literary texts (including the law codes) provide
snippets of information about economic practice,
though they are strongly biased towards the
elite point of view and are not necessarily reliable
when it comes to understanding the details of
everyday economic processes – particularly if
these took place beyond the world of the literary
and political elites. Secondly, inscriptions
incidentally reveal information about urban
economic life, particularly in Italy and Asia
Minor, and particularly about the social dynamics
that surrounded urban manufacturing and
commerce. Epigraphically preserved government
decrees incidentally shed light on the impact of
local and supra-local governments on economic
life. Thirdly, documentary texts, including papyri
and writing tablets, provide detailed information
about all kinds of transactions, including loans,
tax payments, sales, and orders, though they are
only available for a limited number of areas and
sites (e.g., Egypt, Pompeii, Vindolanda).
Archaeological evidence used in the Roman
economy debate includes remains of infra-
structure and buildings, transport containers,
products, coins, and iconographic representations
of economic processes. Remains of port and
road infrastructure give clear indications about
not only the geography of trade routes but also
 
E 2340 Economy, Roman
 
the investment involved in constructing and to its proximity to the major crossing of the Tiber
and, thus, to the flow of people and goods
maintaining the trade network. Similar informa-
between Etruria and southern Latium and
tion can be derived from the remains of commer-
Campania. As a consequence, trade and transport
cial facilities and manufacturing establishments.
were at the heart of the Roman economy right
Transport containers, particularly amphorae, can
generally be provenanced and tend to give an from the start, and the subsequent expansion of
indication of the products they contained. Rome, from early on, was characterized not
only by the spread of political power but also by
Finished products themselves reveal information
about provenance and production technology, the emergence of a tightly knit network of
economic connections – partially created by gov-
and through the emerging practice of “stamping”,
they inform scholars about their makers as ernment policy and partially emerging through
well. Coins and coin hoards allow scholars to market interaction. Politics and the economy
discuss monetization and coin circulation, were closely related: economic integration in
which is fundamental to understanding the many cases preceded and/or fostered political
integration, which would then further enhance
dynamics of trade and transactions. Iconography
economic integration. Where this was not the
plays key roles in debates about the technology of
production processes, showing depictions of case, Romans sometimes appear to have had
work equipment that has not been preserved clear economic motives for expansion, such as
archaeologically. However, archaeological datathe presence of metal ores that could be mined
are biased and unequally divided over the (e.g., Spain, Dacia).
Roman world, both in time and space, and their The city of Rome emerged as the center of
interpretation is often complicated by their inac-
gravity of this economic network early on, and
cessibility and by varying standards of the volume of demand generated by the city
publication. would become a defining feature of the Roman
While the Roman economy debate until the late
economy as it developed from a regional center
1970s was characterized by an overwhelm- into a metropolis of hitherto unknown propor-
tions. From the middle republic to late antiquity,
ing emphasis on textual evidence, and particularly
on literature, the 1980s and 1990s saw a clearmetropolitan demand was a key driving force
increase in the use of material remains in behind the Roman economy and, to a certain
discussing economic issues. extent, behind the Roman political system.
Quantitative
analyses of dated Mediterranean shipwrecks andThe Roman metropolis is a feature that sets
the Roman economy clearly apart from all its
of the geographical spread of terra sigillata pottery
Mediterranean predecessors and separates it
from the imperial period had a deep impact on the
debate, as had the results of field survey projects.
from most of the preindustrial economies of
An increased focus on urban production facilities
Medieval and Early Modern Europe.
in the late 1990s changed the dynamics of the The historical development of the Roman
debate about urban economies. After the turn of
economy was closely related to and to
the millennium, archaeologists increasingly a considerable extent conditioned by develop-
started to explore the possibilities of scientific
ments in the Mediterranean of the first millen-
analysis, including isotopic and DNA analysis on
nium BCE. These include, firstly, the
organic remains, which is now enabling to include
colonization of the western Mediterranean by
material categories into the debate that hitherto
the Greeks and the Phoenicians from the early
had little to offer, such as animal bones and eighth-century BCE onwards and the subsequent
human remains. increase in contacts between Etruscans, Italians,
  and Greeks, which transformed the economic
Historical Context landscape of central Italy and the Tyrrhenian
The emergence of Rome as a local power in Sea and created long-distance trade routes
the seventh and sixth centuries BCE was related between Latium and the Eastern Mediterranean.
 
Economy, Roman 2341 E
 
Secondly, an intensification of Aegean and area. Together, they brought about a dramatic
Eastern Mediterranean trade in the second halfdecrease in transaction costs which made long-
distance transport and trade more feasible than
of the first millennium BCE, and the Helleniza-
tion of the East and Egypt after Alexander, ever before.
created an intensive trade network that the Fundamental to the integration of the Roman
Romans could easily tap into. A similar network
economy was the large network of roads, which
was created by Carthaginian expansion in Northwas created and maintained by the state and
which connected inland regions with each other
Africa and Spain, though this was initially less
readily accessible to the Romans. These develop-
and with the sea. There is debate as to whether
ments were basic requirements for the much more
these roads were specifically created to foster
far-reaching economic integration of the land transport, but there is no debate about the
Mediterranean which took place under Roman fact that they dramatically lowered its costs.
leadership from the last centuries BCE onwards.
Though land transport still was much more
Yet besides economically integrating the expensive than river or sea transport, the vast
road network allowed traders to penetrate areas
Mediterranean to an extent hitherto unseen, the
Roman economy also integrated, unlike Greek that hitherto had been inaccessible at a relatively
and Hellenistic economies had done, the low cost. Comparable investment is visible in
European continent into Mediterranean networksport facilities in the Mediterranean, which
of trade and exchange and saw the development became more numerous and also larger.
of intensive trade and exchange with regions The establishment of colonies and the settle-
beyond the political boundaries of the Roman ment of Romans throughout the Roman world,
world, including Europe and Scandinavia, the but particularly in Roman Europe, also contrib-
Near East, and, particularly, India, which uted to the integration of the Roman economy, as
developed a trade connection with Roman Roman communities retained close contact with
Egypt through the desert, the Red Sea, and theItaly and the Mediterranean. As a result, much
Indian Ocean. Further, there were indirect trading
more accurate information about faraway
connections with China, probably both over markets would have been available throughout
land, via the Silk Route, and by sea, via India.
the empire. The spread of Mediterranean culture
  and consumptive patterns over Roman Europe
  created considerable markets for Mediterranean
Key Issues/Current Debates products, including wine, olive oil, and fish
  sauce, that were not available locally. Integration
Integration of taste also fostered standardization. Especially
A key aspect of the Roman economy was the in the imperial period, certain products (e.g.,
integration of an enormous area into what was, shoes) were standardized to an extent that
essentially, one economic system – even though empire-wide trends in design can be perceived.
the extent of regional fragmentation is not to  
be underestimated. Economic integration was Agriculture
based on the political unity of the Roman Agriculture was the basis of the Roman economy
world, which brought advanced, often state- and occupied, probably, over 80 % of the popu-
sponsored, transport infrastructure; unity in lation. Key crops included the traditional
laws and currency; and the spread, throughout Mediterranean triad of olives, grapes, and
the empire, of large groups of people with good cereals. While evidence for agricultural practice
long-distance connections and of two languages is extremely scarce, it is usually assumed that
that together sufficed to conduct business there was relative technological stability in farm-
throughout large parts of the Roman world. All ing methods. Yet Mediterranean farming
these phenomena were unique, and had not been methods and plant species did disseminate over
seen before on this scale and over such a large a large area, including Europe, and there were

E 2342
major developments in the organization of rural
space, particularly around colonies. The rational-
ized organization of the countryside resulting
from centuriation lowered overhead costs by
improving the accessibility of land and making
the organization and planning of agriculture
easier. In general, there is a clear increase in
the total area used for intensive agriculture,
with intensification being particularly remark-
able in the Latin-speaking west. In Roman
Africa, field survey has shown an increased use
of even rather marginal lands for oleiculture.
While in many parts of the Roman world
the small- to medium-sized farmstead was the
standard unit in agriculture, there is a clear
emergence of farms operating on a much larger
scale, including large villae rusticae owned by
the elite, which came to control significant parts
of the countryside (e.g., Settefinestre). There also
appears to be an accumulation of estates
(latifundia) in the hand of increasingly wealthy
landowners, some of whom would own a rich
portfolio of estates in various parts of the
Roman world. It is assumed that this large-scale
landowning also fostered new agricultural
strategies, including monoculture, and large-
scale clusters for processing. Nevertheless,
mixed agriculture remained the norm on most
farmsteads and villae.
The Roman world also saw a clear increase in
the amounts of agricultural yields that were
consumed at long distances from the place of
production. Metropolitan and army demand fos-
tered agriculture throughout the empire, as is
attested by literary sources and by the amphora
remains from the Monte Testaccio, which show
that, especially in the Imperial period, an over-
whelming amount of the olive oil consumed in
Rome came from Southern Spain. A defining
element of the Roman cereal economy was the
annona, through which the emperor divided grain
among the population of the Roman metropolis.
Most of this grain came from Egypt and Africa.
Other large cities in the empire seem to have had
similar vast areas from which they drew
their basic foodstuffs, though their economic hin-
terland is less well studied. Large-scale fish
processing and garum production on the coast of
Economy, Roman
Roman Africa and Spain, particularly around
the Straits of Gibraltar, was similarly aimed at
a vast imperial market.
 
Raw Materials
As far as the non-food economy is concerned, it is
important to distinguish extraction from
manufacturing. Raw materials for which there
was large-scale and empire-wide demand include
a wide range of metals (gold, silver, tin, lead,
copper, iron, zinc), stone and marbles, wood,
clay, wool, and flax. The availability of these
materials differed – some, such as wool, iron,
clay, and wood, were widely available, but
others, particularly coin metals and marbles,
were only found in specific regions or places.
In the case of coin metals, high-quality
marbles, and colored stone, there seems to be
a direct involvement of the government in extrac-
tion: large mines and quarries were generally
owned and run by the state, and especially in the
case of the important mining regions of Dacia and
Spain, the presence of mineable gold and silver
seems to have played an important role in
conquest. In mining, Romans used advanced
hydraulic technologies to get out the metal ores
in large quantities, which also involved large-
scale investment in aqueducts. They also used
Archimedes’ screws and water wheels to drain
underground mines, so that they were able reach
a much greater depth than in earlier periods. Ores
were smelted on or near the mining site and then
turned into bars or ingots, which were stamped
and transported throughout the Roman world.
When the imperial government was not directly
involved, the evidence suggests more locally
oriented extraction through traditional methods
and on a much smaller scale. This goes for mining
as well as quarrying.
There is clear evidence that materials were
transported and traded in more or less raw form
over long distances. This included wood, raw
wool, flax fibers, stone, and all metals, though
trade was much less intensive when materials
were widely available. The only real exception
is clay, which was generally turned into its final
product in a location close to the pit.
Glass, dependent on the availability of natron,

Economy, Roman
was produced in a limited number of
locations – particularly in the Near East – and
then transported in raw form to the place where it
was turned into a final product, as is indicated
by the discovery of raw glass in several
shipwrecks. Trade in raw wool and linen was
probably limited to the finer qualities from cer-
tain regions and to some bulk trade for the
metropolitan market of large cities, including
Rome itself. Nevertheless, the general picture
suggests intensification and integration compared
to earlier periods.
 
Processing and Manufacturing
In processing materials and foodstuffs, and in
manufacturing consumer goods, small-scale
establishments remained the norm. The typical
workshop was situated in one or two small
rooms and operated by a small work group
organized around a (male) skilled artisan.
Investment in production facilities in such work-
shops was low, and while the workspace was
well-organized, the success of the workshop
mainly depended on the artisanal and organiza-
tional skills of the work group and, particularly,
its leader. In an urban context, workshops would
be situated in or attached to a house, and
members of the (family) household would
form the core of the work group. Most of this
production also seems to have been directly
oriented towards private customers rather than
traders and thus towards local consumption:
many workshops had a shop or were situated
in one, and iconographic representations of
craftsmen show their interaction with customers
as well as their work on the products.
Yet alongside this traditional, small-scale
manufacturing world, there also is an emergence
of manufacturing or processing establishments
operating on a much larger scale. More often
than not, these also were related to long-distance
trade. Imperial period fish-salting establishments
in North Africa and Southern Spain could reach
vast dimensions, and their products were
consumed throughout the empire. High-quality
tableware pottery (terra sigillata) was produced
in a limited number of production sites where
kilns and workshops would operate on a large
2343 E
scale, such as at La Graufesenque or Scoppietto.
Fulling factories at Ostia and Rome employed up
to 100 people and stood at the end of long-
distance clothing trade catering for the metropol-
itan market. Large-scale workshops could be
highly rationalized and use a strict division of
labor and rudimentary materials handling. Liter-
ary texts further suggest the existence of cities
producing large amounts of textiles, though here,
individual production units may have remained
small.
 
Commerce
Roman cities were centers of consumption-
oriented commerce, and commercial facilities
played a highly visible role in the urban land-
scape. Streets, especially in and around city
centers, tended to be lined with shops. These
had wide openings on the street that fostered
interaction between retailers and passersby.
This is a big development from the Greek and
Hellenistic world, in which shops were much less
common and had less wide openings. Here,
commerce was more focused on the agora and
private houses. There is a clear change in the
commercial articulation of cities in the Roman
world, particularly, but not exclusively, in
Roman Italy.
Most shops were related to houses. Medium-
sized atrium houses in Italy would have one or
two shops next to their main entrance; larger
houses could have up to ten. The strip buildings
dominating the cities of Roman Europe also often
would have a shop in front. Besides these
privately managed commercial facilities, there
also is a spectacular proliferation of market
facilities, such as macella and fora, and other
buildings with a (partially) commercial function,
such as basilicae. Most of this was the result
of either state-sponsored initiatives or, more
frequently, euergetism or investment by mem-
bers of local elites. In cities with larger consumer
markets, purpose-built shop complexes emerge,
as happened in Pompeii from the second c. BCE
onwards; the exceptional consumer market of
Rome saw the construction of true shopping
malls, such as, most dramatically, Trajan’s
Markets.

E 2344
This formalization of commercial space
occurred, however, against a background in
which informal commerce also played a key
role. There is considerable evidence for street
sellers and itinerant merchants, who operated on
the street rather than in shops or visited their
customers in their homes. Epigraphic evidence
points to the existence, in many cities, of periodic
markets taking place on fixed days and
following a fixed schedule within a certain
region. This also emphasizes the economic role
of cities as central places where people from the
surrounding countryside could go to get goods
and products that were not available in or around
their villa or village.
 
Technology
Technological innovation is a hotly debated
issue among scholars. It is uncontroversial that
the spread of the Roman economic network over
Europe brought a spread of established, more
advanced Mediterranean technology over
a large area that technologically had been less
well developed and that this had some economic
effect. Yet, beyond that basic tenet, opinions
diverge sharply: some argue in favor of signifi-
cant technological advance, while others argue in
favor of technological stagnation. There is, in
fact, something to say for both sides.
In general, stability was the norm, and produc-
tion processes technologically tend not to differ
radically from earlier periods. A key example is
textile production: spinning and weaving were
done with traditional instruments like the spindle
and the warp-weighted loom. While there is evi-
dence for the emergence of the more advanced
horizontal loom in late antiquity, it does not seem
to have become widespread very quickly.
A similar picture emerges from blacksmithing
and bronze working. While pottery production
saw a clear increase in the use of molds for
high-quality tableware, this must be seen as
a change of strategy rather than as technological
innovation: the technology had been around as
early as the Bronze Age and was widely used
already before the Roman period.
This is not however the whole story of Roman
technological progress: there are several key
Economy, Roman
technologies that found their first widespread
application in the Roman world. Important is
the material revolution caused by the spread of
glassblowing in the first-century AD: glass ves-
sels quickly began to compete with their
terracotta and metal equivalents, transforming
the dynamics of the tableware and storage ware
economies. The invention of the screw press,
presumably in the late first-century BCE, had an
impact on olive and wine production as well as on
the textile economy.
Yet the technological development that is
most radical and most hotly debated is the appli-
cation of water power in several manufacturing
processes in the imperial period. While few
scholars doubt that the principles of mechanical
water power were understood in elite circles, it
was long disputed to which extent these princi-
ples actually were applied in everyday economic
life; however, archaeological work has now
confirmed that water power was not only much
more common than was assumed in the past but
also was a clear development of the Roman
imperial period. Attested are water-powered
installations for milling flour (e.g., at Barbegal
and in Rome) but also to saw stone (e.g., at
Ephesos).
 
Growth
Since the turn of the millennium, the Roman
economy debate has developed a strong focus
on understanding the scale and nature of eco-
nomic growth. Most scholars now believe that
there was at least some form of aggregate growth
in the Roman economy in the late republic and
the early empire. It is believed that maritime
transport reached a high peak in this period and
that this is somehow reflected in the chronologi-
cal spread of Mediterranean shipwrecks, which
shows a clear peak between 100 BCE and 100
CE. Several other datasets have been thought to
show similar peaks, including air pollution levels
as recorded in the Greenland ice cap. All these
data are, however, controversial, so while the
general picture of growth is not in doubt, it has
not yet been possible to map its precise chrono-
logical development or its geographical
dimensions.

Economy, Roman
However, the issue at stake is not so much
the occurrence of economic growth in itself but
rather the relation between growth and demo-
graphic expansion: if the economy grew faster
than the population, GDP per capita would rise,
and living standards would increase. If this was not
the case, GDP per capita would be stable or decline
and so would living standards. The question thus is
to what degree the Roman economy was able to
improve average living standards. The way to do
this would be through technological innovation
and lower transaction costs, which would enhance
productivity. While it is acknowledged that Roman
economic integration lowered transaction costs and
that there was innovation in some sectors of the
economy, it is controversial as to whether these
developments really led to sustained per capita
growth. Some scholars have embraced the Malthu-
sian model of economic growth, which predicts
that, in preindustrial economies, the improved liv-
ing standards generated by per capita growth
directly lead to population increase, which eats
away the positive effect, so that living standards
will have remained approximately at the same
low level. Other scholars point to the boom in
investment in public monuments and urban
leisure facilities such as baths, theaters, and amphi-
theaters and to the increasingly wide diffusion of
luxury goods and domestic decoration throughout
the Roman world, both of which suggest that aver-
age living standards were raised to considerably
above subsistence level in the early empire. How-
ever, this was not necessarily reflected in health
and life expectancy, both of which, as analyses of
skeletal remains and epigraphy suggest, seem to
have remained at levels that are roughly typical for
the preindustrial world.
 
Decline
The strong focus on late republican and early
imperial growth in the scholarly debate has not
yet been matched by an equally strong focus on
the economic history of the Roman world after
the second century, when growth evidently came
to a halt, and the empire and its economy ran into
trouble. Traditional accounts saw the late second
century as the beginning of a sharp decline that in
the end inevitably led to the collapse of the
2345 E
Roman economic system. Current views are
more nuanced and emphasize the dynamic and
unpredictable nature of developments and the
different fates of different regions, with the East-
ern Mediterranean enjoying sustained stability
for much longer than the rest of the Empire and
economic changes in the Latin-speaking part of
the Roman world not only starting earlier but also
being more drastic. While for the Eastern Medi-
terranean it is, in certain ways, possible to speak
of a “transition,” for the western half of the
empire and specifically Europe, “decline” seems
a more appropriate term.
The symptoms of decline become first visible
towards the end of the second century. The large-
scale imperial mines and quarries are deserted in
the last quarter of the second century, which is
followed by a strong debasement of fine metal in
coinage. Investment in large-scale processing
and manufacturing plants is severely reduced,
with few new constructions, and some going out
of use or continuing on a smaller scale. There also
seem to be maintenance difficulties in the road
network; silting problems in harbors are less rig-
orously tackled than had been done before, with
some notable exceptions. This points to a decline
in long-distance trade, which also may be
reflected in the decrease in shipwrecks from this
period (though this also may be related to
a partial replacement of amphorae by barrels).
Monumental construction – both imperial and
euergetic – declines strongly, especially after
the Severan period, taking away one of the
motors of early imperial Roman urban econo-
mies. Price inflation and state attempts to control
the market under Diocletian point to
a perception of serious economic turmoil by the
imperial elite.
As to what caused the changes after the sec-
ond century, there is a range of possible causes.
They can, roughly, be divided into external
causes and internal ones. External causes con-
tributing to economic turmoil include several
epidemics that hit the empire in the late second
and third centuries, including the devastating
Antonine Plague, which raged for 20 years and
caused a significant decrease in population.
Moreover, the third century brought intensive

E 2346
E 2346
warfare at the frontier and several massive inva-
sions from non-Roman Europe. Some scholars
have also suggested that the early imperial econ-
omy was brought into trouble by climate change.
Internal factors contributing to decline may
include political unrest and the long political
crisis of the mid-third century. Further,
a fallout in investment may have led to consumer
economies coming to a standstill, while increas-
ing economic inequality caused more and more
wealth to be concentrated in the hands of
the elite, which has been thought to affect the
buying power of the rest of the population. Some
have argued that early imperial economic pros-
perity simply was not sustainable, so that part of
the process taking place in the third century
would be a natural correction. Yet, it is some-
times hard to distinguish causes from effects,
and in reality, many of the abovementioned
factors may have contributed to decline and
transformation; the debate on this issue has not
yet produced a dominant theory.
 
 
Cross-References
▶ Infrastructure in the Roman World: Roads and
Aqueducts
▶ Trade and Transport in the Ancient
Mediterranean
▶ Villas and Farms in the Mediterranean World
 
Further Reading
BANG, P. 2008. The Roman bazaar. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
BOWMAN, A. & A. WILSON. (ed.) 2009. Quantifying the
Roman economy. Methods and problems. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
FINLEY, M.I. 1973. The ancient economy. London: Chatto
and Windus.
GREENE, K. 1986. The archaeology of the roman economy.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
- 2000a. ‘Technological innovation and economic pro-
gress in the ancient world: M.I. Finley re-considered’.
The Economic History Review 53(1): 29-59.
- 2000b. Industry and technology, in A. Bowman,
P. Garnsey & D. Rathbone (ed.) Cambridge ancient
history XI. The High Empire: A.D. 70-192: 741-68.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
View publication stats
Economy, Roman
El Miron Cave: Geography and Culture
HARRIS, W. 2000. Trade, in A. Bowman, P. Garnsey &
D. Rathbone (ed.) Cambridge ancient history XI. The
High Empire: A.D. 70-192: 710-40. Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press.
- 2011. Rome’s imperial economy. Twelve essays.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
HOPKINS, K. 1980. Taxes and trade in the Roman Empire.
Journal of Roman Studies 70: 101-25.
HORDEN, P. & N. PURCELL. 2000. The corrupting sea.
Oxford: Blackwell.
KEHOE, D. 2007. The early Roman Empire: production, in
W. Scheidel, I. Morris & R. Saller (ed.) The Cambridge
economic history of the Greco-Roman world: 543-69.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MORLEY, N.1996. Metropolis and hinterland. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
- 2007. The early Roman Empire: distribution, in
W. Scheidel, I. Morris & R. Saller (ed.) The Cambridge
economic history of the Greco-Roman world: 570-91.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ROSTOVTZEFF, M. 1957. The social and economic history of
the Roman Empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
SCHEIDEL,W. 2009. In search of Roman economic growth.
Journal of Roman Archaeology 22: 46-70.
SCHEIDEL, W & S. FRIESEN. 2009. The size of the economy
and the distribution of income in the Roman Empire.
Journal of Roman Studies 99: 61-91.
WILSON, A. 2002. Machines, power and the ancient
economy. Journal of Roman Studies 92: 1-32.
- 2008. Large-scale manufacturing, standardization, and
trade, in J.P. Oleson (ed.) Oxford handbook of engi-
neering and technology in the classical world:
393-417. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- 2009. Indicators for Roman economic growth:
a response to Walter Scheidel. Journal of Roman
Archaeology 22: 71-82.
 
 
El Miron Cave: Geography and
Culture
Lawrence Guy Straus1 and
Manuel R. González Morales2
1
Department of Anthropology, University of
New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
2
Instituto Internacional de Investigaciones
Prehistóricas, Universidad de Cantabria,
Santander, Spain
 
 
Introduction
El Mirón is a large cave that dominates a stretch
of the upper Asón River valley at the eastern end