78 THE ROMAN EMPIRE
metals, wood for fuel and construction, other building materials and
clothing, was stimulated by defi ciencies, whether natural or man- made,
permanent or periodic. The unequal distribution of resources from one
region to another, the regular though not precisely predictable crop failures,
the destructive or disruptive action of men and states, generated trade. This
argument too opens the door to wider questions: how to balance trade
narrowly defi ned as market exchange against other forms of exchange
(administrative trade, reciprocity), how to weigh household production (of
textiles, for example) against local and non- local exchange (in its several
varieties). If there is to be a way forward, then it lies in proposing models
that revolve around large issues of this kind, and in testing them, insofar as
is possible, against the available evidence.
Growth and its limits
So far we have been operating with an essentially static model of the Roman
economy. It remains to ask whether the model can accommodate a measure
of economic growth.
A general argument for economic growth under the Principate might run
as follows: the accession of Augustus inaugurated an era of relatively stable
government, the basic condition for economic recovery and expansion. The
new regime was dedicated to the cause of civil peace and the pacifi cation of
Rome’s enemies. The success of this policy furthered internal economic
development, and, insofar as it expanded the territory under Roman control,
extended the economic horizons of the empire. The settlement of substantial
numbers of Italian soldier colonists in northern Italy and abroad promoted
the recovery of central and southern Italy, now relieved of intense pressure
on the land, and furthered the development of more thinly populated areas
of the empire, particularly in the West. Augustus lacked a clear and coherent
policy of stimulating economic expansion, but he did create the conditions
under which economic life could fl ourish. After his reign the pax Romana
was by and large uninterrupted. Apart from the civil wars of 68–69 and
192–93 and the plague of the age of Marcus Aurelius – of uncertain nature
and effect but much less destructive than the bubonic plague of the reign of
Justinian – the empire suffered few major calamities until the middle of the
third century. Finally, the pax Romana encouraged a modest increase in
population, which raised demand and stimulated a measure of economic
expansion. A rising population was easily absorbed in relatively
underpopulated territories such as north Africa, the Iberian peninsula and
Gaul through immigration and colonization.
On the other side, one might question the potential of the economy for
growth. We have seen that the economy was underdeveloped, and that most
of the labour force was employed in agriculture and lived at subsistence
level. The fi rst century and, even more so, the second have been considered