88 THE ROMAN EMPIRE
other outlets when that trade petered out. Rome, hardly neglected by Italian
wine producers in the late Republic, a period of rapid population growth,
was an even better customer at the beginning of the Principate.
Rome, as far as we know, remained a city of around one million people
at least until the second half of the second century. Provincial products
poured in. Agricultural writers led the chorus of ritual complaint, but it
must have been obvious to all that Italy with Rome in its midst could not be
self- suffi cient in the main products, let alone the luxury items required by
the elite. On the other hand, it is diffi cult to believe that Italian farmers,
those with easy access to Rome by river, sea or land, ever lost their share of
the huge market provided by the capital city, whatever the quality of their
products. Rome must always have absorbed most of whatever surplus
remained, whether of wine or of some other product, after local and regional
needs had been satisfi ed.
The period of the Principate, then, saw in the fi rst place the expansion of
provincial agriculture especially in the West. To be sure, this was partly a
consequence of public policies, and the fruits were tapped by successive
Roman governments in the form of taxes and rents, and more directly
through the extension of imperial landholdings outside Italy. Secondly, it
saw a period of recovery followed by moderate prosperity in Italy, for
example in the northern provinces from Lombardy to Histria, in the central
areas of Umbria and inland Tuscany and in Campania and parts of Latium.
Our sources for provincial agriculture are of course very limited, and
archaeology does not and cannot fi ll the gaps in our knowledge left by
literature. The treatise on agriculture that survives from the period, that of
Columella, is Italy- centred, but by no means presents a full and accurate
picture of the state of agriculture in Italy in the middle of the fi rst century.
The evidence that we have, however, is compatible with the hypothesis that
in at least some areas of the agricultural economy of Italy and the provinces,
step- by-step advances in techniques and knowledge were made, better crop-
combinations and seed selections were practised, more effi cient units of
exploitation were arrived at and labour was more effectively utilized. Such
changes represented progress, but within limits: they are consistent with a
rise in productivity, but one of only modest dimensions. From a comparative
perspective, that is to say, set against historical periods that saw major
technological breakthroughs, the period of the Principate deserves to be
categorized as one of relative stagnation.
ADDENDUM
A reasonable question to ask of our chapter title is: an ‘underdeveloped economy’ in
comparison with what? The debate over how far the Roman economy developed has
continued over the past twenty- fi ve years without decisive resolution, but the range