Consumption trends, trading patterns and economic development in Italy across centuries - data analysis of Roman amphorae in a long-term perspective

Consumption trends, trading patterns and economic development in Italy across centuries - data analysis of Roman amphorae in a long-term perspective | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Consumption trends, trading patterns and economic development in Italy across centuries - data analysis of Roman amphorae in a long-term perspective Paulina Komar, Tom Brughmans, Ekaterina Borisova This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4748698/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 11 Jan, 2025 Read the published version in Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory → Version 1 posted 11 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract This paper presents novel insights into the long-term chronological patterns related to the distribution and consumption of amphora-borne foodstuffs in Italy. The study specifically focuses on the consumption of wine, olive oil, and fish sauces, both produced locally and imported from the provinces. Notably, it contributes significantly to our understanding of the Roman economy by revealing significant changes in the patterns of consumption and distribution of these foodstuffs over time on a scale that was previously unknown. One of the key findings of our analysis is the demonstration that the consumption patterns observed in different areas of Italy were similar, suggesting an equal pace of development in both urban and rural settlements across the Apennine peninsula. Importantly, quantitative evidence shows that the consumption pattern observed in the capital city of Rome is less exceptional than previously believed, challenging existing perceptions about the city's uniqueness. The study draws upon a substantial dataset comprising 28,851 diagnostic amphora fragments excavated and documented from 28 different urban and rural settlements in the North Adriatic and central Italy, spanning the period from the 4th c. BCE to the 7th c. CE. The analytical approach employs a probabilistic aoristic method, evenly distributing amphora frequencies across relevant date ranges. amphoras Rome Italy consumption patterns economy Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Introduction The functioning and performance of the ancient economy has long been one of the key debates in Classical Studies. After many years of strong reliance on written sources in this matter (Finley, 1973; Hopkins, 1978 ; 1980 ; 2002 : 190–230), the last two decades have brought a significant turn towards archaeology and the critical quantification of material sources (Saller, 2005 : 223–38; De Callataÿ, 2005 : 361–372; Friesen&Scheidel, 2009 : 61–91; Scheidel, 2009 : 46–70; Lo Cascio, 2009 : 87–106; Erdkamp, 2015; Kron, 2014 : 123–46; Jongman, 2006 : 237–54; id. 2007 a, b; 2009; 2014: 169–88; 2017a: 260–8; 2017b). A number of attempts to understand and quantify movements of goods in antiquity, as well as assessing the volume of trade and nature of market relations have substantially enhanced our understanding of the origins, transport, and consumption of many goods (Bowman&Wilson 2009; Wilson&Bowman, 2018; Franconi et al., 2023 ), but there are still many challenges associated with the imperfections of archaeological data, especially regarding how they reflect ancient economic phenomena. The Roman amphorae data analysis results presented in this paper make a significant contribution to our understanding of the economy of the Roman world, providing novel insights into trade in amphorae-borne products. We use a large dataset consisting of 28,851 diagnostic amphora fragments excavated and published from urban and rural sites in central Italy, perform a quantitative data analysis, and make the dataset and data analysis code openly available to allow for scrutiny and replication of our published results. Our analysis focuses on identifying long-term chronological patterns in the distribution and consumption of amphora-borne foodstuffs in Italy, with a particular focus on the consumption of wine, olive oil and fish sauces with diverse provenances. We critically assess the effects of the imperfections and heterogeneity of our dataset by identifying how robust identified data patterns are in light of different dating evidence and site types, and by complementing the identification of major trends in the combined dataset with more in-depth analyses of subsets relevant for the study of specific places such as Ostia, Rome and the Bay of Naples, of specific foodstuffs and provenances. Our results provide important case studies of changing Italian supply networks and economic connections across the Mediterranean over a 1000 year period (400 BCE-600 CE), reflecting phenomena including changing tastes and demands among Italian consumers of goods, changing production centres in Italy and the provinces, and changing economic interdependencies in the Mediterranean. Materials and Methods Data collection This study is based on published amphora data from 66 individual archaeological excavation sites representing 28 different settlements in central Tyrrhenian and north Adriatic Italy, dated between the 4th c. BCE and the 7th c. CE 1 . These 66 sites were selected because they were argued to be closed contexts, relatively precisely dated, and reliable quantified amphora frequencies are published for them. In addition they provided significant numbers of amphorae, meaning at least several dozens of potsherds, while sites with singular containers or their fragments were excluded due to their lack of representativity. Our data collection aimed to include as many sites as possible in the study area, representing both coastal and inland centres situated on the north and south as well as east and west of Italy. The chosen sites represent both urban, harbour and rural contexts, though the former are considerably more represented and they provided higher numbers of pottery sherds. This paper concentrates on numbers of diagnostic fragments of transport jars (rims, bases, and handles - RBH), that were published for each site, as this is the most commonly used method of calculating pottery sherds, contrary to minimum number of individuals - MNI, maximum number of individuals - MAX or estimated number of vessels - EVE, which cannot always be approximated (or as in the case of MAX have only been used by few scholars, e.g. Ehmig, 2003 ). A comparable quantitative data analysis by Franconi et al. ( 2023 , Fig. 4 with description) on amphorae from Germania revealed that using RBH and NMI in most cases provides similar general results, while MAX shows some different trends (because MAX is only used for a handful of sites). In this paper we will use published RBH frequencies consistently, and results should be interpreted as such. However, these still remain frequencies of diagnostic sherds and are therefore most representative of attested typological diversity than of consumption volume. For this reason, we do not merely perform queries of amphora frequencies but equally of typological diversity and the numbers or sites at which they are attested (i.e. their distribution). The database includes 28,851 diagnostic fragments of amphorae from all over the Mediterranean representing 204 individual types. Each entry in our database represents a unique combination of amphora type excavated at a certain site, and its published RBH frequency. Each amphora type is accompanied with a geographic origin (Tyrrhenian, Adriatic, Aegean, Oriental, Cypriot/Cilician, Egyptian, African, Tripolitanian, Lusitanias, Tarraconesian, Baetican, Spanish, Gaulish) as well as the typical ‘content’, which records its most commonly carried product (wine, olive oil, olives, fish products, alum, unknown). We use the Southampton Roman amphora database (University of Southampton (2014) Roman Amphorae: a digital resource [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] https://doi.org/10.5284/1028192 ), and other, more recent publications, if possible, as a key reference for both origin and typical content. The origin but especially the typical content are not known in all cases, and these are explicitly marked as ‘unknown’ in the database. To give an impression of the quantitative impact of these unknown contents we compare data patterns of diverse contents with those of ‘unknown’ contents. Moreover, a production ‘Start date’ and ‘End date’ are recorded for every container form, according to their standard typologies (most following the Southampton Database), which are classified as ‘Type dates’ in our database. Considering that these dates mark when the amphora was produced rather than when it was actually used, they are also accompanied with the ‘Start date’ and ‘End date’ of the context where the form was discovered - the so-called ‘Site dates’ on the graphs we present. Sites are identified by their modern names (and if possible ancient names) as well as their function: urban, harbour/urban, rural and unknown. Urban sites clearly predominate in the database − 46 entries, and added to this are nine harbour sites (marked in our database as ‘urban/harbour’), predominantly from Ostia, but also from the Adriatic part of Italy. There are also 10 rural sites, which include hinterlands close to ancient urban centres and isolated inland settlements, in the neighbourhood of which no bigger ancient centres were discovered. The remaining ‘site’ was classified as unknown, as it concerns amphorae from different (and quite old) museum collections in Padova, and no information regarding their possible discovery are available. The database includes geographic locations of each site, and whether they are in Adriatic, Tyrrhenian or Central Italy. This database structure allows for it to be compared or merged with other datasets in future synthetic pottery analyses, and the inclusion of each site’s URI from the Pleiades gazetteer allows it to be linked to other datasets with this identifier. The chosen method is not free from the risk of misidentification of amphorae by ceramologists working on it prior to the publication of the archaeological report. In order to minimise this risk we considered mostly recent open access publications for which we could verify the ceramic identifications. However, the aim of this study is to identify large-scale trends that are robust to a certain degree of misidentification, and we therefore consider it inappropriate to interpret the small-scale patterns and variations in our results which are much more sensitive to misidentification. Other problems to be acknowledged include the reuse of amphorae and their replacement with barrels in certain areas. The scale of reuse was likely small but its impact on amphora data patterns should be formally assessed in future studies (Brughmans&Pecci, 2020 ), while the use of barrels has only been confirmed for a limited time period and geographic area (Marlière, 2002 ; Marlière&Torres Costa, 2005 ; 2007; Komar, 2021 : 6). Nonetheless, we refer to these possible biases while discussing results of our study further in this paper. Table 1 Description of all fields in database Field Name Type Description 'Amphora_type' string Commonly used typologies for Amphora type 'New_type_name' string Indicates values in the field ‘Amphora_type’ that are treated as the same type in the analyses. 'Amphora_type_merged' string The same as ‘Amphora_type’ but fields that have a value in ‘New_type_name’ are updated with that name. Typologies for Amphora type that take into account grouped types from ‘New_type_name’ 'Provenance' string A region where an amphora was produced: 1. adriatic italy 2. baetica 3. tyrrhenian italy 4. gaul 5. aegean 6. spain 7. unknown 8. aegean/oriental 9. africa 10. pergamon 11. anatolia 12. crete 13. rhodes 14. cyprus/cilicia 15. south italy/EM 16. lusitania 17. tarraconesis 18. Africa/sicily 19. calabria/sicilia 20. orient 21. palestina 22. tripolitania 23. sicilia 24. italy 25. italy - tiber valley 26. cilicia 27. spain/sfrica 28. ionian 29. sardegna 30. italy/sicilia 31. black sea 32. ibisa 33. egypt 34. sicilia/italy/western mediterranean 35. western mediterranean 36. nan 'Content' string A product carried in an amphora: 1. wine 2. olive oil 3. fish sauce 4. defrutum 5. unknown 6. nan 7. olives 8. fruits 9. alum 'Site' string A modern name of an archaeological site from which an amphorae assemblage came 'Site_type' string A site category: 1. urban 2. urban/harbour 3. rural 4. unknown 'Grouped_sites' string A grouping of the field ‘Site’ per region or ancient settlement (e.g. grouping all sites in Rome under a single ‘Grouped_sites’ value ‘Roma’) 'Amphora_type_lower_date' float A production start date of an amphora 'Amphora_type_upper_date' float A production end date of an amphora 'Lower_context_date' float A consumption start date of an amphora 'Upper_context_date' float A consumption end date of an amphora 'Frequency' float An amphora frequency 'Pleiades URI' string Site geographical coordinates according to the Pleiades Atlas 'Latitude' float Site geographical coordinates in latitude 'Longitude' float Site geographical coordinates in longitude 'Tyrrhenian_vs_Adriatic' string Indication of whether the site is on the Tyrrhenian, Adriatic or Central regions of Italy. 1. Tyrrhenian 2. Adriatic 3. Central, but better connected with the Adriatic region 4. Central 'Publication' string Bibliographic reference for assemblage publication 'Period' string Categorical indication of site chronology in Roman historical period: 1. MR/LR (middle Republication to late Republican) 2. LR (late Republican) 3. LR/EI (late Republican to early Imperial) 4. EI (early Imperial) 5. EI/LI (early Imperial to late Imperial) 6. LI (late Imperial) 7. unknown 'Notes' string General notes on the sites and types 'Site_notes' string Notes and considerations on the site and its location 'Amphora_type_notes' string Notes and considerations on the amphora type or typical prime use contents designation 'Problems' string Considerations of problems related to the type identification and whether they could be merged with other types. Data analysis methods In the result section we present outputs of three types of queries (rows in figures): temporal changes in sherd frequency, the number of sites at which amphorae were attested, and the number of amphora types. We generate all three queries using two different sources of dating (columns in figures): ceramic typological dates are considered to be more representative of production patterns, and context dates are considered more representative of consumption patterns. We do this to explore differences in production and consumption patterns, but also to remain critical to how typological and site occupation dating might structure the results. The queries are performed using a probabilistic aoristic method which divides a frequency equally over each year within a relevant date range (Crema, 2012 ; Johnson, 2003), a method that has been used before in Roman archaeology to explore temporal patterns in ceramic datasets (Fentress&Perkins, 1988 ; Franconi et al., 2023 ). This method is explained and applied in a previous study by some of the authors on Roman amphorae in Germania (Franconi et al., 2023 ) and we use the same implementation of queries here. The queries are implemented in Python and openly available in iPython notebooks per figure to enable replication of all results and figures. 2 The sherd frequency results using type dates are produced by dividing the frequency of an amphora type over the years of the standard typo-chronological date range of that amphora type, and summing up all results per year. The sherd frequency results using context dates are produced by dividing the frequency of all sherds in a dated context by the number of years in that site’s contextual date range, and summing up all results per year. As stated above, we believe the sherd frequency results are most sensitive to selection, survival and publication biases. We therefore interpret the sherd frequency temporal patterns as descriptions of the available published data, and not as direct reflections of traded volumes. We believe the site count and amphora type count queries to produce more robust results in light of known biases. The site count queries using type dates are produced by counting the number of sites per year that have evidence of any amphora type for which that year is within its typo-chronological date range. The site count queries using context dates are produced by counting the number of sites per year that have evidence of any amphora type and where the year in question is within the context’s date range. These site count queries give us a good description of general temporal trends in the width of distribution of amphorae: periods in which certain amphorae were present in many places, and periods when they had a more restricted distribution. The amphora type count queries using type dates are produced by counting per year the number of different amphora types for which that year is within its typo-chronological date range. This query gives a good description of temporal trends in the frequency of amphora types that were produced. The amphora type count queries using context dates are produced by counting the number of different amphora types per year, where that year is within the context’s date range of the context where the amphora type was found. These two queries give a good description of the general temporal trends in the number of amphora types that were respectively produced or consumed: periods when more amphora types circulated, and periods when fewer amphora types were deposited at sites. Results We present new results on patterns of trade in amphora-borne foodstuffs in Central Italy as well as chronological trends in the consumption of wine, olive oil and fish sauces of various provenances and destinations. In this section we first describe general patterns in the database as a whole, which is followed in the next section by a more detailed description of trends. These patterns allow us to trace a number of important economic phenomena, such as changes in Italian and provincial supply and demand as well as changing commercial networks in the Mediterranean. A detailed interpretation of how our results reveal these phenomena is presented in the subsequent discussion section. Effects of dating evidence and site grouping The overall chronological patterns following type dates and context dates, though similar in a broader perspective, differ in their details. In Fig. 1 a we see that using context dates shows a dramatic peak in frequency during the late 1st c. CE. But using the type dates significantly reduces this peak. This pattern points to the overrepresentation of Flavian contexts, especially in Rome, which should not be interpreted as a period of particular increase in amphora importations beyond what the peak of “type dates” shows. The frequency lines are overall very similar, however, which means that most of the Mediterranean foodstuffs were consumed in Italy from the beginning until the end of the life of their commercial packaging (i.e. the amphorae). Figure 1 b shows the comparison between the two dating methods when considering the count of sites at which amphorae are present. The line reflecting type dates suggests that the distribution width of amphorae in Italy experienced a dramatic increase in the early second century BCE and a similarly abrupt fall around the late third and early fourth century CE. However, the distribution width is rather different when using context dates for the same amphora data: we notice a dramatic growth around 150 BCE), while the fall in distribution occurs as early as 200 CE. Although most amphora types were produced until c. 300 CE, their consumption in Italy stopped abruptly at the end of the 2nd c. CE, which suggests a consumption crisis associated with factors other than political and economic instability during the 3rd c. CE. Perhaps consumption trends in Italy changed earlier than in the rest of the Mediterranean and it may suggest a different pace of economic development for different parts of the empire. Figure 1 c shows more similarity in the comparison between the two dating methods when considering the diversity of amphora forms in the sample, and revealing a higher diversity of amphora types in the early imperial period. Although neither dating method is without issues, this comparison of their results allows us to identify patterns that are visible no matter what dating method is used, and patterns that are very sensitive to the choice of the dating method. Having such a quantitative understanding of the impact of these dating methods on the results is crucial for enabling an appropriate interpretation in the discussion section. No matter which method of dating we choose (Fig. 1 a, b, c), all graphs show us similar general patterns (with the exception of the distribution width: Fig. 1 b). We observe an overall increase in amphorae in Italy from 200 BCE, which accelerated considerably during the 1st c. BCE. The period between 100–200 CE experienced the highest frequency, distribution and diversity of transport containers. Moreover, all graphs show a general decrease in frequency (Fig. 1 a), site count (Fig. 1 b) and type count after 200–300 CE. The 50% drop, or even more than 90% in the case of the frequency graph, might point to a dramatic shrinking of the Italian economy towards the end of the Empire. All site count results presented in this paper concern counts of settlements (e.g. Pompeii) and not individual excavations within that settlement (e.g. Casa di Ariadna). But what is the impact on these site counts of grouping excavations within settlements together? Fig. 2 demonstrates that the patterns are the same, but their magnitude is different. This is hardly surprising given our dataset consists of 66 excavations at 28 settlements, and grouping the same ceramic data together will merely result in a reduction in the magnitude of the pattern by roughly 40 sites. We argue that it is most meaningful to present and interpret results for settlement counts rather than excavation counts throughout. Deposition settlement type The remainder of our results focus on three major substantive avenues of investigation: deposition settlement type (urban, harbour or rural; Fig. 3 ), typical content (wine, olive oil or fish products; Fig. 4 ) and vessel origin (e.g. Italy, Aegean, …; Figs. 5 and 6 ). Figure 3 reveals comparable patterns of deposited ceramics at different site types, suggesting consumption and distribution diversity were comparable at different site types across Italy. Regardless of site type, the highest volumes and most diversified foodstuffs were consumed during the early Imperial period, and all experienced late Republican increase in consumption and late 2nd/early 3rd c. decrease which lasted until the end of the Empire. However, there are a few differences between the site types’ patterns. Most striking is the clear difference in magnitude, mostly reflecting the number of sites of each type (Urban = 20 grouped sites, corresponding to 46 individual sites; Urban/harbour = 3 grouped sites, corresponding to 9 individual sites; Rural 9 grouped, corresponding to 10 individual sites; Unknown = Padova varie). This magnitude difference is most striking in the frequency results (Fig. 3 a,b), the late 1st c. CE peak being caused by overrepresentation of urban contexts that were precisely dated to the Flavian period by their construction phases. Type counts show a slightly higher diversity of types in urban centres, especially after 300 CE, but trends in growth and decline follow almost identical shapes for all site types (Fig. 3 e, f). We also note that rural sites have a much lower frequency and type count diversity compared to urban or urban/harbour sites (Fig. 3 , a-b, e-f), suggesting less diversity in amphora consumption at rural sites but also revealing a lower frequency of ceramics from rural sites having been published. Finally, the increase for urban centres started earlier (200 BCE) than in urban/harbour or rural sites (100 BCE) (Fig. 3 a, d), but this should be associated with the fact that no rural or urban/harbour contexts dated before 150 BCE are present in the database. Typical content Figure 4 also shows similar patterns for wine, olive oil and fish products, though the former were the earliest to reach Italy. Wine carried in amphorae (the so called ‘Greco-Italic’ produced at the beginning in the south of the Apennine Peninsula and later in Campania and Adriatic Italy) appeared in central Italy already during the 4th c. BCE in very small volumes, while fish products and olive oil started to arrive c. 200 years later. From the perspective of amphora frequency and type count (Fig. 4 a, b, e, f) it is clear that wine amphorae were most common and diversified, especially during the Republican period. At the same time, wine is present at comparable numbers of sites as oil and fish amphorae (Fig. 4 c, d). Imported olive oil and fish-sauces started to appear in Italy during the 2nd c. BCE, on a highest number of sites (Fig. 4 c, d) but until the turn of the eras they were rather rare (Fig. 4 a, b). From the Augustan age until 200 CE the amounts of all the oil and fish amphorae (Fig. 4 a, b) were comparable and their presence in various contexts was equally widespread (Fig. 4 c, d), and after this date their partial disappearance was parallel. Again, amphora production dates (Fig. 4 a, c, e) show less abrupt changes than context dates (Fig. 4 b, d, f), the latter suggesting more dramatic shifts in consumption patterns of all types of foodstuffs. These results demonstrate that there was much more diversity in wine amphorae (Fig. 4 e, f) compared to containers with other content, which reflects a higher diversity in wine consumption (although the typical content of many types is unknown). This diversity can refer to both geographic origins of wines or their different qualities - literary sources mention many more wine than olive oil or fish sauces varieties in antiquity (Komar 2020: 76–127; Komar 2021 : 14–17). On the other hand, the typological variation of wine amphorae is higher than the diversity of olive oil or garum jars. Therefore, some issues related with typological variations of amphora forms and their classification may also be responsible for these differences (Fig. 4 e, f). Vessel origin This study clearly demonstrates that Italy imported goods from all over the Mediterranean, the main supplying provinces being: the Aegean, Africa, Baetica, Gaul and Sicily. What concerns imports from the east, (Fig. 5 ) Aegean amphorae arrived earliest, appearing from 200 BCE. During the mid-2nd c. BCE they were followed by Tripolitanian imports, while other Oriental (Levantine, Egyptian, Cypriot and Cilician) and Anatolian products appeared at the turn of the eras. Aegean amphorae are most frequent among the eastern imports, and were also attested on a considerably higher number of sites than other types of containers (Fig. 5 c, d). Anatolian, Tripolitanian and Oriental amphorae are less attested in Italy (Fig. 5 a, b), but they retained their limited distribution and diversity (albeit in small volumes) when those of Aegean amphorae declined in various contexts starting from the 3rd c. CE (Fig. 5 c-f). During this period they also became much more diversified, exceeding the diversity of Aegean products, as indicated by the type count (Fig. 5 e, f). Figure 6 shows results for amphorae of Western Mediterranean origins. All started to appear in Italy after 200 BCE, while their numbers, diversity and distribution grew considerably at the late 1st c. BCE (using production dates) or early 1st c. CE (using consumption days). Baetican products had the highest frequency and they were also most widely attested on different sites in Italy until 200 CE, but after this date they almost disappeared giving way to African containers. They were followed by Lusitanian and Calabrian/Sicilian amphorae. A considerable change in Italian supply may be observed after 200 CE, when all imports decrease significantly. Imports from the Iberian Peninsula and Gaul disappeared from the record, either by the change in container type (from amphorae to barrels) or a breakdown in production capacities in the West during the 3rd century. This makes African, Lusitanian and Calabrian/Sicilian goods the most common on the market, but even though they were quite widespread in different parts of the Apennine Peninsula, their combined numbers constitute only a small percentage of Baetican imports during the Early Empire. African types were the most diverse starting from the first century CE, as shown by Fig. 6 e, f, especially during the late Imperial period. However, the high diversity of African containers during the late Imperial period, cannot only be interpreted as reflecting high diversity of African products on the Italian market, but should rather be associated with typological issues - in Keay’s typology (Kaey, 1984) many forms exist in several variants, which points to a lack of standardisation rather than deliberate actions (see e.g. Keay 61 Type, Variants A, B, C & D or Keay 62, A, D, E, Q & R). Discussion In the following sections we place these results in a broader context and explore their implications for Roman economic history. This will be done in six parts, starting from the broad trends revealed above and their economic implications, followed by more in-depth evaluations of production and consumption patterns in different parts of Italy: Economic development in Italy Production of export goods in Italy and Sicily Rome: exception or rule? Consumption in the rest of Italy Supply of foodstuffs to Italy 1. Economic development in Italy This study clearly shows that amphora-borne staples were present in Italy in considerable quantities and diversity between 200 BCE and 500 CE (Fig. 1 ). However, a significant increase in the Frequency and Site count curves can be observed during the 2nd and 1st c. BCE, they remain stable until c. 200/300 CE and after this date they fall to the levels of the middle Republican period and stay low until the end of our period of study. From the perspective of the consumption dates, this trend demonstrates a real boom in importing foodstuffs to Italy between c. 100 BCE and 200 CE. But both the flow and ebb of amphorae were dramatic, which suggests that there must have been sudden changes in trade and consumption patterns in Italy throughout the Roman Imperial period. The overall pattern mirrors what has been observed for other archaeological proxies of economic growth - a general growth in urbanisation and mining activity in the Mediterranean (De Callataÿ, 2005 ; Scheidel, 2009 ; McConnell et al., 2021; Hanson, 2016 : 95–6), a construction boom in Italy and Germany (Jongman, 2007b : 615; 2007a: 189–90, graph 3 and 4; 2009; 2014: 174–5, Figs. 2 and 3 .), production boom suggested by increase in wine and olive presses and garum factories (Wilson, 2014 : 158, Fig. 8 ; Marzano, 2013b : 133–4, Fig. 5.12 and 5.13; 2013a; 2015) and a consumption boom, which was well documented especially in Italy (Santangeli Valenziani&Volpe, 2012: 66–7; Volpe, 2009 : 379–81; Jongman, 2007a : 189–90, graph 3 and 4; id. 2014: 174–5, Figs. 2 and 3 ; De Ruyt, 2000 : 178–9; Komar, 2021 ). All of these phoenomena started around the Augustan age and lasted until the late 2nd c. CE. This pattern, reflected most clearly by a Site count (Fig. 1 b), can be compared with models of economic growth in the Roman Empire. There is a consensus among scholars that aggregate economic growth occurred between the late Republican age and the 2nd c. CE, but its nature and scale are still debated (Hopkins, 1978 ; 1980 ; 2002 : 190–230; Saller, 2005 : 223 − 38; De Callataÿ, 2005 : 361–372; Friesen&Scheidel, 2009 : 61–91; Scheidel, 2009 : 46–70; Lo Cascio, 2009 : 87–106; Erdkamp, 2015; Kron, 2014 : 123 − 46; Jongman, 2006 : 237 − 54; 2014: 169 − 88; 2017a: 260-8). For example, certain scholars argue that the growth was rather moderate and unsustainable, stopped by population growth (Saller, 2005 ; Scheidel, 2007: 332 − 46; 2009: 46–70), while others presume its sustainability, blaiming external factors (epidemics or ill-guided policies of the emperors) for the economic contraction (Silver, 2007: 191–252, especially 236-9; Temin, 2013 : 220 − 39). Our results, demonstrating the abrupt and huge increase in imports from all over the Mediterranean suggest that gross growth probably took place in most parts of the empire during the late Republican and early imperial period. Rapid enrichment of the inhabitants of Italy as a consequence of the conquest of new territories, war booties and incomes from new investments during the last years of the Republic, postulated by Scheidel ( 2009 ) offers a potential explanation of the consumption boom on the Apennine Peninsula. However, it also seems that the Roman conquest, unification of the Empire and capital brought by the Roman elites positively influenced the productivity in the provinces. The Aegean region and the Iberian Peninsula, Baetica in particular, were the most productive regions of the Empire until the 3rd c. AD, but they gave way to Africa during Late Antiquity. The quantities of Spanish goods, mostly Baetican olive oil, but also wine from Tarraconensis and fish sauces from Lusitania highlighting the special role that the Iberian Peninsula and especially the province of Baetica played in Italian supply. It should be emphasised that the consumption boom during the late Republic and early Empire regarded Aegean wines and Baetican olive oil in particular. Aegean imports were not only the earliest Eastern amphorae to arrive in Italy, but also the most numerous (Fig. 5 a, b), the most widespread along the Apennine Peninsula (Fig. 5 c, d) and the most diverse (Fig. 5 e, f). This confirms the suggestions of other scholars, according to which Greece was a main Italian vineyard (Komar, 2020), as Egypt was its granary. Considering that Baetican olive oil was the second product among those that most largely contributed to the consumption boom, the role of this province as an olive oil warehouse for Italy and Rome in particular, already suggested by the discoveries from Monte Testaccio (E.g. Remesal Rodríguez, 2008 ; 2018; 2019 ), now seems even more pronounced. Nevertheless, the position of Baetica is not as dominant among western amphorae as the role of the Aegean area among Eastern Mediterranean amphorae, which suggests that the supply from the west, which included considerable amounts of Gallic and African products, was more even and diversified than the supply from the east. After 200 CE the Aegean provisions broke abruptly and the share of goods from the rest of the Eastern Mediterranean in Italian supply became almost equal. The diversity and distribution width of Oriental, Anatolian and Tripolitanian amphorae in Italy did not change much between the early and late imperial period (Fig. 5 c, d, e, f), despite the fact that after the 3rd c. AD the demand was considerably smaller as a consequence of wars, depopulation, movement of the capital and a general instability (O’Donnel, 2009, 48; Durliat, 1990 , 117, Fig. 1 ; Russel, 1958: 73). It seems therefore, that the Italian consumption shrinkage affected mostly the Aegean imports, or that this part of the Mediterranean experienced the strongest problems in surplus creation and was no longer able to satisfy the demand in the centre of the Empire. At the same time, the considerable decrease of Baetican olive oil imports (and other products from the Iberian Peninsula) on Italian market cannot easily be interpreted in the similar manner due to the barrel issue, but the political instability in the West postulated by a number of other studies (Keay, 1988 : 173–178), inclines to acceptance of the hypothesis regarding the shrinkage of the export economy of the Iberian Peninsula during Late Antiquity (Funari, 1994 : 99–101). Moreover the frequency curves (especially at Fig. 6 ) demonstrate that even though Africa dominated the late antique supply, its capacity for provisions should not be overestimated. All products from Africa during Late Antiquity hardly reached a half of Aegean wines or Baetican olive oil imported during the early Empire. It seems that population growth in Italy was not able to devour the general wealth for over 200 years of the Principate, as the numbers of imported products suggest wellbeing and stability, which was only broken at the turn of the 2nd and 3rd c. CE. The decrease in amphora frequency is too abrupt and dramatic to be explained as a result of natural factors. Sudden, external shocks, such as plagues (of the Antonines and Cyprian), which caused the economic problems in the Empire (McConnell et al., 2021), seem a better fit with the amphora data. Therefore, the results of this study corroborate better with the assumption that there was a sustainable development in the Roman economy and that it was stopped by external factors. Furthermore, our aggregated data from terrestrial sites can be compared with the shipwreck curve created by Parker and later analysed by Wilson (Parker, 1992 ; Wilson, 2009 a, b). Numbers of shipwrecks diminished in the early 2nd c. CE, that means a century earlier than frequencies of amphorae. Our study, therefore, agrees with the assumption that the decrease in the number of attested shipwrecks was due to other reasons than the collapse of trade and cannot be seen as an indicator of Roman economic performance during this century (Wilson, 2009a ; 2009b ; 2014 ). Finally, Fig. 2 b demonstrates a 3rd c. decrease in imports and then a small recovery during the 4th and 5th centuries, which, however, cannot be compared with late Republican and early Imperial prosperity. We could, thus, suggest the following hypothetical scenario: the sustainable economic growth in Italy was stopped by the Antonine plague and then strengthened by the crisis of the 3rd Century (civil wars and barbarian raids, Cyprian plague etc.). The attempts to restore the Italian well-being were probably impeded in Late Antiquity by climate change (Harper, 2017 . But new data does not allow to link economic and population changes with the climate, see Roberts et al., 2019 ; Xoplaki et al., 2021 ), but they cannot be properly approached using amphora statistics due to the use of barrels, which became much more popular during Late Antiquity. The type count (Fig. 1 c) shows that there was a higher diversity of amphora types in the early imperial period, coinciding with a supposed period of economic development. More amphora diversity means more variability in offer for consumers and potentially more competition on the market. This diversity could indicate an increased prosperity reflected in an increased ability to import from diverse regions, but also potentially a decentralisation and freedom of choice which would not exist if only foodstuffs from one or few producing regions were available. Obviously, a wider variety of amphora types per se is too little to argue about the prevalence of free market commercial transactions over the coerced transfers, but the correlation of this pattern with the period of economic growth is of interest. Interpreting the decrease in diversity of amphora types during Late Antiquity is difficult since it is obscure whether the pattern reveals certain market changes in variability of goods or is simply caused by the use of barrels, which replaced many amphora types. The results presented in Fig. 3 show that the consumption levels grew between 200 BCE and 200 CE all over Italy and that the pattern was similar for urban, harbour and rural areas. The magnitude of the growth and decline, however, varies depending on whether we count the number of sites of each type and the number of ceramics published per site type. Overall, this means that imported foodstuffs were available not only to the urban inhabitants of big cities or the ports that received supplies for these cities, but also to people living in the country. Therefore, smallholder farmers living in distant areas of the Apennine Peninsula, commonly seen as very self-reliant for their subsistence, had access to imported goods. This suggests that the economic growth indicated by the scale of imports was not unevenly distributed and not limited only to imperial and municipal elites, which could indicate that it had a per capita character. This agrees with other studies emphasising an early Imperial wellbeing of the inhabitants of Italy (Kron, 2005 : 70–1, 77–8; Jongman, 2007b : 608–9; 2007a: 194, graph 7; Kron, 2014 : 129; contra Wilson, 2009b : 74; Wilson, 2014 : 149, 156; Koepke, 2016 ; Harper, 2017 : 77, Fig. 3 .3 and Jongman et al., 2019 ). An important caveat is provided by the much more limited diversity of types at rural settlements (Fig. 3 e-f), suggesting their inhabitants had access to less diverse foodstuffs. As mentioned above, the earlier influx of imported goods registered in urban areas cannot be interpreted by an assumption that people inhabiting Roman cities got access to imported goods earlier than villagers, and especially workers associated with harbour facilities (Fig. 3 b). This just shows that earlier contexts were distinguished in the cities, which are so far lacking in other types of sites, as it would have been illogical to assume that no imports reached ports via which the cities were supplied. It is worth mentioning that all types of sites experienced a decrease of imports after 200 AD, which demonstrates that the 3rd c. crisis and late antique ‘recession’ had a similar impact on urban and rural areas, at least in terms of accessibility of imported foodstuffs. 2. Production of export goods in Italy and Sicily Italy not only consumed goods imported from the provinces, but also produced high volumes of wine and olive oil, which were exported during the late Republic mostly to Gaul (wine), military camps on the German limes, the Eastern Mediterranean and even as far as India (Gupta, Williams&Peacock 2001 ; Lawall, 2006 ; Tchernia, 2016 , 276–296; Franconi et al., 2023 ). Nonetheless, during the early Empire these surpluses largely remained on the Apennine Peninsula due to the increased demand for foodstuffs. We therefore zoom in on the consumption of different Italian amphorae to explore economic conditions and the pace of development of different parts of the Apennine Peninsula (Fig. 7 ). Sicily, although it is clearly a province, is included here, because of challenges the attribution of the provenance of a few amphora types, especially Dr 21–22 and Keay 52, which were produced both on the island and in south Italy, most probably in Bruttium and Calabria (Panella&Rizzo, 2014 , 135–149). The inner part of the Apennine Peninsula was almost insignificant in terms of supply in amphora borne-goods, and only the Tyrrhenian and Adriatic facades and the Tiber Valley were regions that allowed for large-scale regional and pan-Mediterranean export of their staple goods. Production of surpluses for export started earlier in western Italy, but in the eastern part it was more intensive during the early Empire. Only these Adriatic and Tyrrhenian products gained popularity all over Italy, whilst other amphorae had a limited distribution (Fig. 7 c-d) and (except from Sicilian) diversity (Fig. 7 e-f). Tyrrhenian Greco-Italic forms appeared from 350 BCE and were accompanied by other types of Italian production. Starting from the turn of the era, Adriatic amphorae became more frequent and typologically more diverse than Tyrrhenian ones (Fig. 7 ), especially on the sites situated on the eastern part of Italy, and their predominance continued until the early 2nd c. CE. However, in this period Tyrrhenian amphorae were present on slightly higher numbers of sites than Adriatic amphorae were (Fig. 7 , c-d). Tyrrhenian and Adriatic amphorae patterns suddenly drop after 200 CE. It seems that some Tyrrhenian and Adriatic amphorae continued to be produced in the 3rd c. CE and they were exported abroad, e.g. Dressel 2–4 jars discovered near Hadrian’s Wall (Arthur, 1995 , 245; Arthur&Williams, 1992 , 253–254; Williams, 2004 , 449), but their consumption in Italy almost ceased. Amphorae produced in the Tiber Valley (‘di Spello’ type) were in use between the second half of the 1st and 2nd c. CE, but their distribution width was not particularly high. It seems that the export of wine from the Tiber Valley was limited mostly to supply Rome and its neighbourhood. According to Tchernia ( 2016 : 81–82), the Tiber Valley blossomed as a wine exporter during the crisis in Campanian viticulture caused by the eruption of Vesuvius. Our results show that amphorae from the Tiber Valley remained in circulation until the economic breakdown of the late 2nd and early 3rd c. CE (Fig. 7 ). Containers from Sicily and south Italy were rare throughout the whole antiquity, but remained in production and consumption after 300 CE (e.g. Calabrian/Sicilian type Keay 52) when most other Italian productions ceased being widely distributed. These results reflect that the biggest consumption centres, such as Rome and the Po Valley, gave impulse to surplus production in the neighbouring Tyrrhenian and Adriatic areas. This production was moreover exported outside of Italy. When it ceded (at least based on amphora evidence), new production areas entered the stage, such as south Italy and Sicily - the distribution of flat-bottom containers in Sicily and the Mediterranean shows that during the Early Roman period their supply was limited to a few places in Sicily, a few in Tyrrhenian Italy and Gallia Narbonensis, while only in late Roman times the distribution pattern changed to pan-Sicilian and pan-Mediterranean (Franco 2014 , especially Fig. 7.4–7.8). The continuing presence in Italy of the wine of Brutti (Keay 52 amphorae of Calabrian/Sicilian origin), praised by Cassiodorus as a delicacy (Cassiod. Variae XII 12), might have been the result of the outflow of Egyptian grain to Constantinople and the later Vandal conquest of Africa, which caused the growing demand for Sicilian grain, and probably other products from the region, which was becoming gradually important for the Roman nobility. On the other hand, the appearance of the Keay 52 type further correlates with the Aurelian-era distributions of wine for Rome’s inhabitants - they are the only Italian wines transported in amphorae during this period, which, according to some scholars, links them with canon vinarius paid by these areas after their inclusion to Vicariato Suburbicario ( Pacetti, 1998; Panella, 1993 , 646; 2001, 180, 196; 2017, 114). 3. Rome - exception or a rule? The city of Rome is often considered an exceptional urban community in the Mediterranean - the Empire’s hub to which all roads led. It was the biggest centre of consumption, with imperial elites among its inhabitants, and particularly well connected with the rest of the Mediterranean. The so called ‘primitivist’ theories assume that big cities, such as Rome, Alexandria, Ephesus and Carthage, received more imports than ordinary settlements, but that these patterns were exceptional (Finley, 1999 : 123–149; Bang, 2008 : 142, 297–298). Is this reflected by amphora production and consumption patterns? The frequency and type count curves from Rome (Fig. 8 ) show the same general pattern as the dataset as a whole: the appearance of amphorae c. 400 BCE, an increase in the 2nd and 1st c. BCE, peak in the 1st c. CE and the sudden and almost constant decrease in frequency and diversity after 200 CE (but a higher type diversity in the late Imperial times than during the late Republic). This similarity is not surprising, since the frequency of evidence from Rome constitutes 49% of the entire dataset and therefore plays an important part in shaping the overall pattern (14,145 out of 28,851). The amplitude is much bigger while looking at context dates than when considering only type dates, but as mentioned above this is associated with a high number of contexts that could be precisely dated to the narrow period of the Flavian rule. Figure 9 demonstrates that wine amphorae were not only the most common, but also the earliest to be imported to Rome. Olive oil and fish sauce containers were not attested in larger quantities before the turn of the eras and they reached a peak during the early Imperial age. Olive oil jars disappeared gradually after 300 CE, while fish sauce jars remained until at least 400 CE, but after 200 CE their quantities dropped considerably. In comparison to the overall dataset patterning (Fig. 4 a-b), wine is even more dominant in relation to other contents. Nevertheless, the lack of considerable differences in the amphora curve for Rome as compared to the pattern established for the whole dataset suggests a couple of important potential research issues. First of all, it seems that what happened in Rome did not stay in Rome, but was soon mirrored all over Italy, albeit possibly on a smaller scale. The consumption habits of the Roman ruling elite, at least in terms of types and provenance of wine, olive and fish products, did not considerably differ from the habits of the rest of Italy. This corroborates with Rowan’s studies of sewers in Pompeii, which show that the diet of the wealthy did not differ in principles of the diet of the poor (Rowan, 2015 ), as well as with the results of the research in Portus (O’Connell et al. 2019 : 731). Secondly, we should ask a question whether it was inhabitants of Italy that imitated the consumption patterns of the Romans or the other way round. For example, there is evidence that wine from Crete became very popular in Campania around half a century before it flooded the tables of the inhabitants of the Urbs (Komar, 2020: 179). Finally, it seems that Rome, although definitely exceptional as the seat of the emperor, senate and elite, might have behaved as an ordinary city in other aspects, i.e. consumption of basic foodstuffs. On the other hand, since the research regarding the city of Rome has been the most scrutinised it allows us for a better understanding on certain trends observed in our amphorae curves. For example, the reduction in amphora frequency after 200–300 CE could be associated with a drop in demand for foodstuffs. It is assumed that during the 2nd c. CE the city had a population of roughly one million inhabitants, which decreased to 800,000 around 400 CE, while the transfer of the capital to Ravenna and Constantinople as well as the Vandal raids might have resulted in the population shrinking to just 100,000 by 500 CE (O’Donnel, 2009: 48). Other estimates are even more pessimistic, setting the Roman population during the 5th c. CE at 350,000 and during the 6th c. CE at a mere 60,000 inhabitants (Durliat, 1990 : 117, Fig. 1 ), or even as little as 58,000 around 419 CE (Russel, 1958: 73). The change in amphorae patterns during Late Antiquity could also reflect changing consumption habits. A part of ‘old’ Roman elites moved to Ravenna and Constantinople, and new elites with possible different consumption habits appeared in Italy. The development of Christianity encouraging fasting and ascetic practices among devotees might have also influenced the decrease in demand, wine in particular (but wine used during the Eucharist was still needed and might have levelled this decrease), and to a lesser degree also olive oil and fish products. However, we expect such factors would account for a smaller part of the reduction of amphora patterns as compared to the effects of a significant decrease in the city’s population size. 4. Consumption patterns in different areas of Italy In Fig. 10 we compare the patterns from Rome with those from sites in Ostia, sites along the Bay of Naples (which includes mostly contexts from the Vesuvian Cities (Pompeii and Stabiae), but also from Naples, Puteoli and Cuma), and all other sites in the dataset. These results allow us to conclude that all areas of Italy had a comparable pattern of growth and decline seen through the consumption of different amphora-borne products, but with some differences in amplitudes. For example, Figs. 10 a-b clearly demonstrate how Rome makes up about 49% of frequency in the database, and allows us to explore how the pattern of Rome differs from that in other areas. Frequency graphs organised according to amphora production dates (Fig. 10 a) show that all areas imported goods according to the same general pattern, but we can notice that the frequency peak in ‘Other’ started slightly earlier, that means already in the late 1st c. BCE and early 1st c. CE. On the other hand, this earlier increase is less pronounced when looking at site dates (Fig. 10 b) or type count (Fig. 10 c, d). The highest diversity of amphora types is attested in Rome, but Ostia, especially during the 1st c. CE almost reached Roman levels. The Bay of Naples has the lowest diversity. The highest diversity of products in the capital is perfectly understandable, as this is what we also observe in modern times - the largest diversity of consumers lives in big cities, which is why the widest variety of goods is necessary in order to satisfy their demand. The main function of Ostia was to supply Rome, which is why the variety of goods attested there was comparable. However, despite attempts in magnifying the capacity of Portus , it was not able to receive all the goods that the capital demanded, which is why it soon started to specialise in receiving western products, while the eastern reached Puteoli in Campania (Pavolini, 1996 : 228–230; Komar, 2020: 159). This also explains the lower diversity of products in the Bay of Naples - only eastern goods were common and popular there. Considering that Campania produced plenty of high quality agricultural goods, so needed less imports, only a small part of western commodities reached this area (e.g. for special demands of certain consumers or simply incidentally). We will now explore the consumption patterns of typical contents for Ostia, the Bay of Naples and all other Italian sites (Figs. 11 – 13 ). Wine amphorae were significantly more frequent and diverse in Ostia than olive oil or fish sauce containers (Fig. 11 ). This reflects the pattern observed for Rome (Fig. 9 ). Imports of olive oil and fish sauces reached Ostia from the 2nd c. BCE, but since numbers of wine amphorae increased during this period, for fish sauce amphorae the growth started in the late 1st c. BCE, while for olive oil jars in the 1st c. CE. Imports peaked in the first century CE and declined after the second century. This suggests that Ostia became an important reloading place for Roman supply starting from the beginning of the Empire and remained such until the 2nd/3rd c. CE. This peak period also coincides with the infrastructure investments of Augustus, Claudius and Trajan in the neighbouring harbour of Portus (Meiggs, 1973 ; Giuliani, 2001 ; Boetto&Bukowiecki, 2010 ). It should be mentioned that there are few contexts in Ostia dated to Late Antiquity so it is difficult to understand what exactly happened after the 3rd c. CE. The frequency curve for the Bay of Naples (Fig. 12 ) differs considerably from the general pattern for the whole of the Apennine Peninsula (but it is important to note that this frequency graph is based on just 3% of all sherds, a summed ceramic frequency for the Bay of Naples of 866). The frequency peak occurred 100–200 years earlier - in the late Republican period and not in the early Imperial period (Fig. 12 b). This pattern is best reflected when using site dates (Fig. 12 b) rather than type dates: the former reflects better the fact that the Vesuvian cities were not occupied after the eruption in 79 CE and the crisis in Campanian production caused by this event (Tchernia, 2011: 113 − 14). The frequency curve based on type dates (Fig. 12 a) roughly agrees with the general pattern, established for Italy as a whole, except for an earlier higher peak in wine amphora frequency, which equals the Imperial levels. Olive oil and fish sauce containers were attested in comparable quantities, but a number of amphorae of unknown content is very high in this region, so establishing a content for a part of amphora types currently classified as unknown is likely to change patterns. The consumption pattern for Italy with Rome, Ostia and the Bay of Naples excluded shows again a similar development - wine amphorae were the first and most commonly imported (Fig. 13 ). They considerably exceeded numbers of other jars during the Republican age and peak in the early 1st c. CE (Fig. 13 b). However, the more limited variability between amphorae carrying different contents at Italian sites shows a clear difference with the consumption pattern in Rome (Fig. 9 a-b), where the quantitative dominance of wine amphorae is much more extreme. Wine was clearly the most widely consumed amphora-borne foodstuff regardless of the area of Italy. The high frequency of wine amphorae in Campania during the late Republican age on the one hand points to its role as a wine producer, while on the other highlights consumption capacities of towns and villae otia in the region (Adams, 2005 : 274–293; Varriale, 2016 ; Marzano&Métraux, 2018 ). Olive oil and fish amphorae on the other hand demonstrate no considerable differences between the consumption trends in the capital and on other sites. 4a. Tyrrhenian vs. Adriatic consumption and economic development The Tyrrhenian part of Italy started to consume foodstuffs imported in amphorae around 400 BCE, but until 200 BCE their numbers were low and imports were limited to wine (Fig. 14 ). Olive oil and fish sauces became more frequent during the 1st and 2nd c. CE and, as elsewhere, after 200 CE a drop in their numbers may be observed. Site dates (Fig. 14 b) demonstrate that imports were consumed in Italy in higher quantities during the 1st and 2nd c. CE. Note the particularly high levels of wine transport containers dated to the Flavian period for Tyrrhenian sites as compared to Adriatic sites (compare Figs. 14 b and 15 b). This is caused by contexts dated to the Flavian period predominating in the Tyrrhenian part of Italy, especially in Rome. Site count shows (Fig. 14 c, d) that wine, olive oil, fish sauces and other goods were equally widely distributed in the western part of Italy. However, wine, as elsewhere, was imported in highest volumes (Fig. 14 a, b) and diversity (Fig. 14 e,f; although the typical contents of many types is unknown), though diversity in imported wine types may only be observed during the period of the consumption boom. Consumption patterns in Adriatic Italy differ in interesting ways, because the frequency of wine and olive oil containers is almost equal but much lower in amplitude compared to the Tyrrhenian sites (compare Figs. 14 b and 15 b), while fish sauce and other products are attested in very small numbers. Another interesting difference is the much lower diversity of wine amphora types at Adriatic sites as compared to Tyrrhenian sites (compare Fig. 14 f with 15 f). Site count (Fig. 15 c, d) shows that numbers of sites which imported amphorae were only slightly lower during Late Antiquity than during the Principate, which suggests that even though the general volume of imports decreased starting from the 3rd c. CE (Fig. 15 a, b), imported products had a broader range than in the Tyrrhenian part. The highest diversity of goods was registered during the early Imperial period, and regarded mostly wine, and those of unknown content (Fig. 15 e, f). The high number of types with unknown prime use contents in late antiquity reveals the need for more research dedicated to identifying these contents. Numbers of imported products, their scale and diversity did not differ much between the western and eastern parts of Italy, though it seems that the Crisis of the Third Century had a different impact on these two areas. In the Tyrrhenian part numbers, range and diversity of imports decreased significantly due to the effect of the peak of wine amphorae in the 1st -2nd centuries CE, while in the Adriatic this wine peak did not exist and so the drop in the third century is less pronounced. 4b. Foodstuffs in cities vs. foodstuffs in villages Figures 16 , 17 and 18 demonstrate that there were no considerable differences in the consumption patterns between urban, rural and harbour sites in Italy - all imported the highest quantities of wine, especially, between 1 and 200 CE, but wine was also much more popular during the late Republic. Olive oil held the second position in urban sites and harbours, while fish sauce amphorae were more common in rural sites (Fig. 16 a, b, 17 a, b, 18 , a, b). All amphora types, regardless of the foodstuff they carried, had an equally wide distribution, but wine containers had a wider distribution in the late republican period in urban contexts (Fig. 16 c, d; 17 c, d; 18 c, d). Wine amphora types were the most diverse in urban and harbour sites from the late Republican and early Imperial period, and they were also slightly more diverse on rural sites in this period (although the prime use content of a high number of types is unknown). Diversity of fish sauces and olive oil containers was comparable (Fig. 16 e,f; 17 e,f; 18 e,f). These patterns show that no considerable differences can be observed in consumption trends of different foodstuffs on rural, urban and harbour sites. All consumed high volumes of wines, olive oil and fish sauces, but obviously on harbour and especially rural sites both their volume and diversity were smaller. This difference is caused by much lower numbers of rural sites with lower ceramic frequencies in the database (see Fig. 3 ). Also, it seems that cities and harbours imported more olive oil than fish sauces, while villages needed more fish products than olive oil. Although the quantities and differences are small, this is an interesting minor pattern. The explanation of this phenomenon may be quite simple - most rural sites were situated inland, where local production of fish products is limited due to lack of sea fish and often salt. At the same time, olive trees can be easily cultivated and they grow even better in hilly inland territories than at the coast. 5. Italian supply in different foodstuffs We have already analysed production and consumption patterns from the perspective of the product provenance and destination. Now it is time to concentrate on each type of imported foodstuff separately in order to analyse in detail how the supply of Italy in wine, olive oil and fish products was organised and which were the main supplying regions. 5a. Wine suppliers to Italy There were four main areas that supplied Italy with imported wine, namely: Africa, Gaul, Spain (provinces Baetica and Tarraconensis) and the Aegean region (mostly islands belonging to the province of Asia, as well as Crete). However, from the 4th and 3rd c. BCE until the Augustan age almost all wines consumed in Italy came from the Apennine Peninsula, from its Tyrrhenian and Adriatic part, with an overwhelming preponderance of the latter at the turn of the eras (Fig. 19 a). They were transported in Greco-Italic amphorae, produced mostly in southern Italy and Sicily, but also elsewhere in the Apennine Peninsula (Lyding Will, 1982 ; Vandermersch, 1994 ) as well as probably in Lamboglia 2 containers starting from the 2nd c. BCE (Formenti, Hesnard&Tchernia 1978). Aegean wines were the earliest provincial imports and they reached Italy already in the 2nd c. BCE. There are, however, single finds of Rhodian stamps, which suggest an even earlier appearance of Greek wines in Italy, that means the late 3rd c. BCE. Nevertheless, even based on stamps, one may conclude that larger-scale and more diversified imports started during the 2nd c. BCE (Taylor, 1957 : 134; Lusuardi Siena, 1977 : 233–234; Bevilacqua, 1994 , 463; Tchernia, 1986 : 103; Pascual Berlanga, Ribera i Lacomba&Finkielsztejn, 2008 : 509–513), which corresponds with the results of this study. Aegean wines were followed by Tarraconesian in the 1st c. BCE, but wine from Spain was never imported in particularly high volume. During the Augustan age, Gallic imports appeared in Italy and they reached a peak in the late 1st c. CE, exceeding Tyrrhenian and Adriatic wines (at least using amphora production dates). Imports of African and Baetican wines started during the Augustan age and lasted until c. 400 and 200 CE respectively. All wine imports were the most numerous between 1 and 200 CE, and fell down to very modest levels after this date. Site dates point to particularly high levels of Tyrrhenian and Aegean amphorae during the late 1st c. CE, but this was probably due to predominance of contexts dated to the Flavian period in the database upon which this study was based (Fig. 19 b). All types of imports were distributed all over Italy, but Italian, Aegean and to a lesser degree Gallic wines were discovered on the highest number of sites, other imports being considerably less common (Fig. 19 c, d). Aegean and Gallic imports had also the highest diversity (Fig. 19 e, f). The obvious conclusion is that Italy was rather self-sufficient in terms of wine supply until the Augustan age, as both its Tyrrhenian and Adriatic parts produced enough to satisfy most of the consumption demand. The only provincial imports that counted during the late Republic were Aegan vintages, often highly praised in literary sources from this period, which indicates that they were top quality products during the Republic. Large quantities of Gallic, Spanish and African wines were necessary in Italy during the first two hundred years of the Principate, but it seems that also during this period the Aegean region was the most important provincial wine supplier considering the volume of imports, their distribution and varieties. These varieties, however, were no longer among eastern luxury products (Komar 2020: 76–127). Gaul held the second post in imperial wine supply, but Gallic wines were clearly less numerous and less widely distributed. Moreover, after 200 CE only provincial imports from the Eastern Mediterranean and Africa were seen on the Italian market, but it should be emphasised that they arrived in much smaller quantities. Surprisingly, Oriental wines have a wider distribution in Italy during Late Antiquity and their diversity is higher than before the 3rd c. AD. Also, they appear to have been more popular than the Aegean and African wines during this period. It is clear that wine trade had the biggest share in Italian supply and that wine was not only the earliest, but also the most important import (Fig. 4 a, b). Therefore, we should not overestimate the role of the trade in Baetican olive oil, which, although seems massive from the perspective of Monte Testaccio, was actually less economically important than wine. 5b. Olive oil suppliers to Italy Adriatic Italy was the most important olive oil supplier during the Republican and early Imperial period, but since the 1st c. CE, high numbers of Baetican and African olive oil containers appeared on the Apennine Peninsula (Fig. 20 a, b). Olive oil amphorae from the Aegean region and the Tyrrhenian part of Italy were minor in volume, distribution and diversity. Adriatic olive oil containers were the most widely distributed during the Republican age, while Baetica overtook this position during the early Imperial age and Africa started to dominate during the late Empire (Fig. 20 c, d). Considering diversity, African containers held a first place throughout the whole Antiquity. These results clearly demonstrate that the Italian olive oil suppliers were considerably less numerous than the suppliers of wine. Only two provinces, Baetica and Africa provided the Apennine Peninsula with significant quantities of olive oil, the former being more widely distributed, but the latter probably providing the highest variety of oil types. These imports must have been particularly important for the Tyrrhenian part of Italy, which produced considerable surpluses of wine, but almost none of olive oil. At the same time, cultivation of olives and oil production was vigorous in the Adriatic part and during the Republican age this region satisfied most of the need for imported olive oil on the Apennine Peninsula. Maybe this explains the scarcity of Dressel 20 amphorae observed in the Adriatic part of Italy 3 . As elsewhere, we see that most provincial imports were consumed during the first 200 years of the Empire and that their consumption was the most intense until 200 CE. 5c. Fish products suppliers to Italy Figure 21 demonstrates that Baetica was the main Italian supplier of imported fish products. These imports started in the Augustan age, they were the most numerous between 1 and 200 CE and attested in a high number of contexts (Fig. 21 a, b, c, d). The second post was held by Lusitania - the range of amphorae from this area was particularly high during late Antiquity. Other areas that also produced salted fish and fish sauces, that means Gaul, Africa and Hispania Tarraconensis could not compete with Baetica, as both the volume and distribution range of imports from these areas were considerably smaller, c. 10% of Baetican results. Africa produced a significant number of fish amphorae, which were more numerous than Baetican during the late Imperial age. Tyrrhenian and Adriatic fish amphorae are in minority. It seems that Italy, both Tyrrhenian and Adriatic, produced very little salted fish and fish sauces and had to rely mostly on provincial imports. The products from Baetica were the most important, especially during the early Imperial age, which indicates that this region was the most indispensable among Italy’s suppliers, providing the highest volumes of both olive oil and fish sauces, at least until the 3rd c. AD. During Late Antiquity African products became much more significant, but in terms of fish sauce provisions, African imports gave way to Lusitanian in frequency and diversity. Other areas, such as Gaul and Hispania Tarraconensis provided Italy with some amounts of fish products, but they were neither numerous nor popular, as only attested occasionally in small quantities. Conclusions This paper investigates many different aspects of amphora assemblages discovered in 66 sites across Italy, including 28.851 diagnostic fragments dated roughly between 400 BCE and 700 CE. This scale of amphora analysis for Italy has never been attempted before, but a similar study regarding transport containers discovered in Germania has been undertaken (Franconi et al., 2023 ), so the results can easily be compared. Previous synthetic works were limited to one or a few sites at most (E. g. Terme del Nuotatore in Ostia, see Panella&Rizzo, 2014 ; or several contexts in Rome, see Rizzo, 2003 or Rizzo&Moreno Megías, 2019 ) and they adopted traditional approaches of quantitative visualisations, presenting numbers of fragments (all, RBH, NMI or EVE etc.) and occasionally their weight, and using only site dates. Therefore, analyses of long lasting trends in amphora commerce and consumption based on a large database and presented according to different visualisation methods were missing. The methods we have used here not only demonstrate new ways of quantifying and classifying ceramic assemblages at a broad, synthetic scale, but also are transparent and can be reproduced for assemblages from other areas of the Roman Empire or beyond in the future. Thanks to these methods we were able to identify known patterns and reveal completely novel chronological patterns of the trade and consumption of amphora-borne foodstuffs in Italy. First of all, it has been suggested by a number of archaeological sources (see above) that the Roman Empire experienced extensive and maybe also intensive growth during the end of the Republic and the beginning of the Principate and that this growth might have had a sustainable character, although there are still many doubts regarding this matter. This study provides further evidence suggesting that the growth existed, and that it can be observed all over Italy, regardless of geographic location and the function of the site. The variations observed between the Tyrrhenian and Adriatic parts as well as between urban and rural zones regarded only the scale of consumption increase and product diversity. Considering that the observed consumption boom existed not only in the capital, but also in inland rural parts of the Apennine Peninsula, it seems reasonable to conclude that it might have had a per capita character, that means brought a general improvement of life standards for all the inhabitants. During the late Republican and early Imperial period the ubiquity of goods, reflected in the number of sites they were attested at, and diversity of products, seen by both the highest number of amphora types and their almost pan-Mediterranean provenance, were the highest. Such patterning suggests a considerable market integration during this period, as also argued in other studies that analysed different categories of evidence, namely grain prices and eastern sigillata (Brughmans&Poblome, 2016 ; Temin, 2001 ; 2013 ; contra see Tchernia, 2011:101–131 and Bransbourg, 2012 ). The fall in amphora curves after 200 CE seen not only by the frequency, but also by site and type count, was equally dramatic all over Italy and touched both urban, harbour and rural areas, which suggests sudden external shocks as a cause of the decline and, at the same time, the sustainable character of the growth. Moreover, this study showed that Rome was not exceptional in terms of consumption trends and commercial supply networks, as results observed for Rome resembled the general pattern as well as the trends noted for different parts of Italy separately. What happened in Rome was probably soon, or immediately followed all over Italy, which suggests that the inhabitants of the capital might have set trends for most of the parts of the Apennine Peninsula, or that Roman supply was simply in line with general consumption trends. Therefore, if the consumption boom is to be interpreted as a sign of economic growth, it seems that Italy in general (not only Rome) experienced this growth that lasted from c. 200 BCE and had a peak in the 1st and 2nd c. CE and was followed by a 3rd c. decrease. The general lack of differences in consumption patterns between cities and villages (except for the volume of imports), again suggests the same pace of development of these areas. Moreover, this implies that rural sites were not outcasts isolated from the general economic growth of the Empire. Since fish products were important elements of the Roman, even inhabitants of inland villages could import them, regardless how far from the seaside they lived. This points to a general similarity in the diet of the wealthy and the diet of the poor (demonstrated also on a smaller scale by other studies) and may also indirectly suggest the existence of the per capita growth. All parts of Italy imported considerable amounts of each type of amphora-borne foodstuff, which again indicates that the development and consumption, and the supposed economic growth had a similar pace all over the Apennine Peninsula, and cannot only be associated with conspicuous consumption of the Roman elites. Therefore, it is possible to suspect that the growth had other causes than only a conquest of new territories and predatory actions, as suggested by Scheidel ( 2009 ). Even if the conquest and exploitation of the provinces brought the first spur of economic development, then this must have been supported by other factors, such as the general productivity, which allowed small farmers in the centre of the Apennine Peninsula to enjoy imported foodstuffs (especially wine) as a daily and natural choice, not a luxury. This study sheds new light not only on the economic development, consumer preferences and trading networks on the Apennine Peninsula, but also in the provinces. Italy was supplied with amphora-borne foodstuffs predominantly from the coastal provinces, such as Africa, Hispania Baetica, Tarraconensis, Gaul, Sicily, Achaia, Asia, Cilicia and Palestine. However, the supply was not equal throughout, as different areas blossomed and withered in different conditions and chronological periods and they also specialised in different types of supply. Regarding provincial imports Aegean wines came first and remained the most common in Italy during the Republican and early Imperial age. Gaul and Hispania Tarraconensis were other, but less important imperial wine suppliers. All these imports, however, disappeared after the Crisis of the Third century leaving the market for African and Oriental wines. Baetica was the main Italian olive oil and fish sauce supplier, but its position was important only during the first 200 years of the principate. During this period fish sauces came to Italy also from Lusitania, Gaul and Hispania Tarraconensis, but in much smaller volumes and diversity. However, during Late Antiquity both live oil and fish sauces were imported mostly from Africa, and in the case of the latter Lusitania, which became the main foodstuff supplier in this period. Wine was definitely an important element of the diet and high volumes needed to be imported constantly between 400 BCE and 600/700 CE, with the highest levels of wine consumption obviously attested for the early Empire. The large-scale imports of olive oil and fish sauces lasted considerably shorter than the imports of wine. All three categories of foodstuffs were equally traded to different parts of Italy regardless of geographic location and site function, the only exception being small differences in olive oil and fish products between the cities (higher needs for olive oil) and villages (higher needs for fish sauces). Summing up, the trade patterns presented in this study revealed elements of consumption preferences in Italy and production strategies in widely different parts of the Mediterranean, stretching from the Iberian Peninsula and through North Africa to the Levant. Furthermore, this analysis provided evidence regarding the agricultural productivity and specialisation in different regions of Italy. This study has shown that the Tyrrhenian part of Italy started to produce surpluses earlier, already during the middle Republican period, but during the 2nd c. BCE, the Adriatic part joined the Italian amphora production and export. Nevertheless, since the Tyrrhenian part specialised predominantly in wines (famous Campanian vintages), the Adriatic was equally active in both production of wine and olive oil. There is little amphora evidence regarding the large-scale production of fish sauces for export on the Apennine Peninsula. The Central Tyrrhenian coast and north-Adriatic Italy (the Po Valley in particular) were main (if not the only) pan-Italian producers of export surpluses during the Republican and early Imperial period, but in the 2nd and 3rd c. the Tiber Valley blossomed as wine supplier to the capital. During Late Antiquity south Italy (and Sicily) became the only supplier in amphora-borne foodstuffs, probably mostly wine, from the Apennine Peninsula. Summing up, this study confirmed and revealed not only commercial and consumption trends in Italian supply, but also their dynamism in both time and scale, as well as their duration. This comprehensive view allows us to understand the tastes and preferences among Italian consumers as well as long-distance trade connections between Italy and other regions of the Roman Empire. It is worth emphasising, that the patterns of Mediterranean integration and disintegration have not so far been quantitatively empirically explored on Empire-wide levels, but only limited to narrow case studies 4 . This study is, thus, the first one to offer such a broad perspective and is the first based on such a large database for Central Italy. Actually, each pattern or trend revealed by this study could be an object of a detailed analysis, which considers other categories of evidence that are beyond the scope of this paper. Overall, this paper not only provides methodological guidance for future synthetic approaches to pottery analyses, but can also be seen as an incentive for further studies of different economic trends observed based on amphora quantifications. Declarations Competing Interests: The authors declare none. Funding statement This research project was financed by a grant from the National Science Centre in Poland No. 2019/35/D/HS3/02142 (PK); Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond (DFF) Sapere Aude research leadership grant (0163-00060B) for the MINERVA Project (TB); Danish National Research Foundation (DNRF) Centre of Excellence for Urban Network Evolutions (UrbNet) (DNRF119) (TB). Author Contribution Paulina Komar and Tom Brughmans wrote the main manuscript text and Ekaterina Borisova prepared figures 1-21. All authors reviewed the manuscript. Acknowledgement We thank Laura Paulsen for data preparation. Data Availability The dataset used is openly available as part of our Github repository: https://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata. References Adams, G. (2005). The nature of the villa suburbana in Latium and Campania : literary and spatial analysis of social and potential entertainment functions from the 2nd c. BC to the 2nd c. AD, Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Adelaide. Arthur, P. (1995). Roman exports to the North. Wine in the West: a view from Campania. In Swaddling, J, Walker, S, Roberts, P. (Eds .), Italy in Europe: economic relations 700 BC–AD 50 (pp. 241–251). British Museum. Arthur, P.&Williams, D. (1992). Campanian wine, Roman Britain and the third century A.D. Journal of Roman Archaeology 5, 250–260. Bang, P.F. (2008). The Roman bazaar: a comparative study of trade and markets in a tributary empire. Cambridge University Press. Bevilacqua, G. (1994). Bolli anforari rodii da Falerii Novi. In AA.VV., Epigrafia della produzione e della distribuzione. Actes de la VIe Rencontre franco-italienne sur l’épigraphie du monde romain, Rome, 5–6 juin 1992 (pp. 463–475). Roma;. Boetto, G.&Bukowiecki, E. (2010). Portus. Les entrepots de Trajan. Mélanges de l’École française de Rome – Antiquité 122 (1), 303–10. https://doi.org/10.4000/mefra.469 Bowman, A.K.&Wilson, A. (Eds.) (2009). Quantifying the Roman economy: methods and problems. Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.001.0001 Bransbourg, G. (2012). Rome and the economic integration of empire. ISAW Working Papers 3, http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/isaw-papers/3. Brughmans, T.&Poblome, J. (2016). Roman bazaar or market economy? Explaining tableware distributions through computational modelling. Antiquity 90, 393-408. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2016.35 Brughmans, T.&Pecci, A. (2020). An inconvenient truth. Evaluating the impact of amphora reuse through computational simulation modelling. In Bowman A, Wilson A. (Eds.), Recycling and reuse in the Roman economy (pp. 191–237) . Oxford: Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198860846.003.0006 Crema, E.R. (2012). Modelling Temporal Uncertainty in Archaeological Analysis. J Archaeol Method Theory . 19(3), 440–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-011-9122-3 De Callataÿ, F. (2005). The Graeco-Roman economy in the super-long run: lead, copper, and shipwrecks. Journal of Roman Archaeology 18, 361–72. doi:10.1017/S104775940000742X De Callataÿ, F. (2014). Quantifying the Greco-Roman economy and beyond. Edipuglia. De Ruyt, C. (2000). Exigences fonctionelles et variété des interprétations dans l’architecture des macella du monde romain. In Lo Cascio E. (Ed.), Mercati permanenti e mercati periodici nel mondo romano (pp. 177–86). Edipuglia. Durliat, J. (1990). De la ville antique à la ville byzantine. Le problème des subsistances. École française de Rome; Ehmig, U. (2003). Die römischen Amphoren aus Mainz. Frankfurter Archäologische Schriften 4, Möhnesee. Fentress, E.&Perkins, P. (1988). Counting African red slip ware. Afr Romana. 5, 205–14 Finley, M.I. (1999). The ancient economy. University of California Press. Formenti, F., Hesnard, A.&Tchernia, A. (1978). Une amphore (Lamboglia 2) contenant du vin dans l'épave de la Madrague de Giens. Archaeonautica 2, 95-100. Franco, C. (2014). Sicilian amphorae (1st–6th centuries ad): typology, production and trade. PhD thesis defended at Oxford University. Franconi, T., Brughmans, T., Borisova, E.&Paulsen, L. (2023). From Empire-wide integration to regional localization: A synthetic and quantitative study of heterogeneous amphora data in Roman Germania reveals centuries-long change in regional patterns of production and consumption. PLOS One. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279382. Friesen, S.J.&Scheidel, W. (2009). The Size of the Economy and the Distribution of Income in the Roman Empire. Journal of Roman Studies. 99, 61–91. doi:10.3815/007543509789745223 Funari, A.P. (1994). Baetica and the Dressel 20 production An outline of the province's history. Dialogues d'histoire ancienne. 20(1), 87-105. Giuliani, C.F. (2001). I porti di Claudio e Traiano. In Giacobelli M. (Ed.), Lezioni Fabio Faccenna: conferenze di archeologia subacquea (pp. 115-26). Edipuglia. Gupta, S., Williams, D.&Peacock, D. (2001). Dressel 2–4 Amphorae and Roman Trade with India: the evidence from Nevasa. South Asian Studies. 17(1), 7-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2001.9628589 Hanson, J.W. (2016). An urban geography of the Roman world, 100 BC to AD 300. Archaeopress; https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv17db2z4 Harper, K. (2017). The Fate of Rome . Princeton University Press; https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400888917 Hopkins, K. (1978). Economic Growth and Towns in Classical Antiquity. In Abrams, P.&Wrigley, E.A. (Eds.), Towns in Societies: essays in economic history and historical sociology (pp. 35–77). Cambridge University Press. Hopkins, K. (1980). Taxes and Trade in the Roman Empire (200 BC–AD 400). Journal of Roman Studies. 70, 101–25. Hopkins, K. (2002). Rome, taxes, rents and trade. In Scheidel, W.&Von Reden S. (Eds.), The Ancient Economy (pp. 190–230). Edinburgh University Press. Jongman, W.M. (2006). The rise and fall of the Roman economy: population, rents and entitlement. In Bang, P., Ikeguchi, M.&Ziche, H. (Eds.), Ancient economies and modern methodologies. Archaeology, comparative history, models and institutions (pp. 237–54). Edipuglia. Jongman, W.M. (2007a). Gibbon was right: the decline and fall of the Roman economy. In Hekster O, De Kleijn, G., Slootjes, D. (Eds.), Crises and the Roman empire (pp. 183–99). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004160507.i-448.38 Jongman, W.M. (2007b). The early Roman Empire: consumption. In Scheidel W, Morris I, Saller R. (Eds.), The Cambridge economic history of the Greco-Roman world (pp. 592–618). Cambridge University Press. Jongman, W.M. (2009). Archaeology, Demography, and Roman Economic Growth. In Bowman A, Wilson, A. (Eds.), Quantifying the Roman Economy: Methods and Problems (pp. 115–26). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.003.0004 Jongman, W.M. (2014). The new economic history of the Roman empire. In De Callataÿ F. (Ed.), Quantifying the Greco-Roman economy and beyond (pp. 169–88). Edipuglia. Jongman, W.M. (2017a). Afterword to: Keith Hopkins, Taxes and trade in the Roman Empire (200 BC–AD 400). In Kelly C. (Ed.), Sociological Studies in Roman History / Keith Hopkins (pp. 260–68). Cambridge University Press. Jongman, W.M. (2017b). The benefits of market integration: five centuries of prosperity in Roman Italy. In De Haas TCA, Tol GW. (Eds.), The economic integration of Roman Italy: rural comminities in a globalizing world (pp. 15–27). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004345027_003 Jongman, W.M., Jacobs, J.&Klein-Goldewijk, G. (2019). Health and wealth in the Roman empire, economics and human biology. Economics and Human Biology Journal. 34, 138–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2019.01.005 Johnson, I. (2004). Aoristic Analysis: seeds of a new approach to mapping archaeological distributions through time. In Ausserer, K.F., Börner, W., Goriany, M., Karlhuber-Vöckl, L. (Eds.), Enter the Past The E-way into the Four Dimensions of Cultural Heritage : CAA 2003 (pp. 448–52). Archaeopress (BAR International Series). http://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-2085 Keay, S.J. (1984). Late Roman amphorae in the Western Mediterranean. A typology and economic study: the Catalan evidence. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series. Keay, S.J. (1988). Roman Spain. Exploring the Roman World . University of California Press. Koepke, N. (2016). The Biological Standard of Living in Europe from the Late Iron Age to the Little Ice Age. In Komlos, J.&Kelly, I.R. (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Economics and Human Biology (pp. 70–108). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199389292.013.34 Koma,r P. (2020) . Eastern Wines on Western Tables: Consumption, Trade and Economy in Ancient Italy, Leiden/Boston: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004433762 Komar, P. (2021). Wine imports and economic growth in Rome between the late Republic and early Empire. Historia - Zeitschrift fur Alte Geschichte 70(4), 437-462. https://doi.org/10.25162/historia-2021-0016 Kron, G. (2005). Anthropometry, physical anthropology and the reconstruction of ancient health, nutrition, and living standards. Historia - Zeitschrift fur Alte Geschichte 54, 68–83. Kron, G. (2014). Comparative evidence and the reconstruction of the ancient economy: Greco-Roman housing and the level and distribution of wealth and income. In De Callataÿ F. (Ed.), Quantifying the Greco-Roman economy and beyond (pp. 123–46). Edipuglia. Lawall, M.L. (2006). Consuming the West in the East: Amphoras of the western Mediterranean in the Aegean before 86 BC. In Maltifana D, Poblome J, Lund J. (Eds.), Old pottery in a new century. Innovating perspectives on Roman pottery studies (pp. 265-286). "L'Erma" di Bretschneider. Lo Cascio, E. (2009). Urbanization as a Proxy of Demographic and Economic Growth. In Bowman, A., Wilson, A. (Eds.), Quantifying the Roman Economy: Methods and Problems (pp. 87–106). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.003.0002 Lusuardi Siena, S. (1977). Anfore. In Frova, A. (Ed.), Scavi di Luni II (pp. 218–270). G. Bretschneider. Lyding Will, E. (1982). Greco-Italic Amphoras. Hesperia 51(3), 338–356. Marlière, É. (2002). L’outre et le tonneau dans l’occident romain. Mergoil. Marlière, É.&Torres Costa J. (2005). Tonneaux et amphores à Vindolanda, II: contribution à la connaissance de l’approvisionnement des troupes stationnées sur la frontière nord de l’Empire. In A. Birley and J. Blake (Eds.), Vindolanda Excavations 2003/2004 (pp. 214–36). Vindolanda Trust. Marlière, É.&Torres Costa, J. (2007). Transport et stockage des denrées dans l’Afrique romaine: le rôle de l’outre et du tonneau. In Mrabet A, Remesal Rodríguez J. (Eds.), In Africa et in Hispania: études sur l’huile africaine (pp. 85–106). Universitat de Barcelona. Marzano, A. (2013a). Agricultural Production in the Hinterland of Rome: Wine and Olive Oil. In Bowman, A.&Wilson, A. (Eds.), The Roman Agricultural Economy: Organisation, Investment, and Production (pp. 85–106). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665723.003.0004 Marzano, A. (2013b). Capital Investment and Agriculture: Multi-Press Facilities from Gaul, the Iberian Peninsula and the Black Sea Region. In Bowman A, Wilson A. (Eds.), The Roman Agricultural Economy: Organisation, Investment, and Production (pp . 107–41). Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665723.003.0005 Marzano, A. (2015). Villas as instigators and indicators of economic growth. In Erdkamp, P.&Verboven, K. (Eds.), Structure and performance in the Roman economy: models, methods and case studies (pp. 197–221). Editions Latomus. Marzano, A., Métraux, G.P.R., (Eds.) (2018)., The Roman Villa in the Mediterranean Basin: Late Republic to Late Antiquity. Cambridge University Press; https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316687147 McConnell, J.R., Wilson, A.I., Stohl, A., Arienzo, M.M., Chellman, N.J., Eckhardt, S., Thompson, E.M., Pollard, A.M.&Steffensen, J.P. (2018). Lead pollution recorded in Greenland ice indicates European emissions tracked plagues, wars, and imperial expansion during antiquity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Latest Articles. http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/05/08/1721818115/tab-figures-data, accessed 07.04.2021. 10.1073/pnas.1721818115 Meiggs, R. (1973). Roman Ostia (2nd edition). Oxford: Clarendon Press. O’Connell, T.C., Ballantyne, R.M., Hamilton-Dyer, S., Margaritis, E., Oxford, S., Pantano, W., Millett, M., Keay, S.J. (2019). Living and dying at the Portus Romae. Antiquity. 93(369), 719–34. doi:10.15184/aqy.2019.64 O’Donnell, J. (2009). The ruin of the Roman Empire. Profile Books. Pacetti, F. (2004). Celio. Basilica Hilariana: scavi 1987-1988. In Paroli, L.&Venditelli L. (Eds.), Roma dall’antichità al medioevo, 2. Contesti tardoantichi e altomedievali (pp. 435-457). Electa. Panella, C. (1993). Merci e scambi nel Mediterraneo tardoantico. In Carandini, A., Cracco Ruggini, L., Giardina, A. (Eds.), Storia di Roma III 2. L’età tardoantica. I luoghi e le culture (pp. 613–697). Einaudi. Panella, C. (2001). Le anfore di età impériale del Mediterraneo occidentale. In Lévêque, P., Morel, J.P.M.&Geny, E. (Eds.), Céramiques hellénistiques et romaines (pp. 177-276). Presses universitaires franc-comtoises; Paris: Diff. les Belles lettres; Panella, C.&Rizzo, G. (2014). Ostia VI. Le terme del Nuotatore (Studi miscellanei 38). L’Erma di Bretschneider; Parker, A.J. (1992). Ancient Shipwrecks of the Mediterranean and the Roman Provinces. Tempus Reparatum; Pascual Berlanga, G., Ribera i Lacomba, A., Finkielsztejn, G. (2008). Las ánforas griegas y púnicas de recientes excavaciones en la regio VII de Pompeya. In Ballester, J.P., Pascual, G. (Eds.), Comercio, redistribución y fondeaderos. La navegación a vela en el Mediterráneo. V Jornadas de Arqueología Subacuática , Gandía 2006 (pp. 501–517). Universitat Internacional de Gandia. Pavolini, C. (1996). Mercato ostiense e mercato romano: alcuni contesti ceramici a confronto. In Gallina Zevi, A.&Claridge, A. (Eds.), Roman Ostia revisited (pp. 223–242). British School at Rome; Soprintendenza Archeologica di Ostia.. Remesal Rodríguez, J. (2008). Provincial interdependence in the Roman Empire: an explanatory model of Roman economy. In Funari P.P.A., Garraffoni R.S.&Letalien B. (Eds.), New perspectives on the ancient world modern perceptions, ancient representations (pp. 155-159). Archaeopress. Remesal Rodríguez, J. (2015-2016). El monte Testaccio (30 años de investigación). Tribuna d'Arqueologia. 2018, 72-87. Remesal Rodríguez, J. (2019). Monte Testaccio. Un archivo único. In Remesal Rodríguez, J., Revilla, V., Martín -Arroyo, D.J., Martín, A. (Eds.) Paisajes productivos y redes comerciales en el Imperio Romano (pp. 11-28). Universitat de Barcelona. Reynolds, P. (2010). Hispania and the Roman Mediterranean, AD 100-700: ceramics and trade. Duckworth; Rice, C.M. (2011). Ceramic assemblages and ports. In Robinson D, Wilson A. (Eds.), Maritime archaeology and ancient trade in the Mediterranean (pp. 81–92). Oxford Centre for Maritime Archaeology. Rizzo, G. (2003). Instrumenta urbis I: ceramiche fini da mensa, lucerne ed anfore a Roma nei primi due secoli dell’impero. École française de Rome; Rizzo, G.&Moreno Megías, V. (2019). Roma e le prime importazioni di alimenti ispanici trasportati in anfora. Journal of Roman Archaeology 32, 23–38. doi:10.1017/S1047759419000047 Roberts, N., Neil, C., Woodbridge, J., Palmisano, A., Bevan, A., Fyfe, R.&Shennan, S. (2019). Mediterranean Landscape Change during the Holocene: Synthesis, Comparison and Regional Trends in Population, Land Cover and Climate. The Holocene . 29(5), 923-37. 10.1177/0959683619826697. Rowan, E. (2015). Sewers, Archaeobotany, and Diet at Pompeii and Herculaneum. In Flohr, M.& Wilson, A. (Eds.), Economy of Pompeii (pp. 111–33). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198786573.003.0005 Russell, J.C. (1958). Late ancient and medieval population. American Philosophical Society; Saller, R. (2005). Framing the debate over growth in the ancient economy. In Manning, J.J.G.&Morris, I. (Eds.), The ancient economy: evidence and models (pp. 223–238). Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474472326-018 Santangeli Valenzani, R.&Volpe, R. (2012). Paesaggi agrari della viticoltura a Roma e nel Suburbium. In Ciacci, A., Rendini, P., Zifferero, A. (Eds .), Archeologia della vite e del vino in Toscana e nel Latium. Dalle tecniche dell’indagine archeologica alle prospettive della biologia molecolare (pp. 61–69). All Insegna del Giglio. Scheidel, W. (2009). In search of Roman economic growth . Journal of Roman Archaeology 22, 46–70. doi:10.1017/S1047759400020584 Taylor, D.M. (1957). Cosa: black glaze pottery. MAAR. XV, 65–193. Tchernia, A. (1986). Le vin de l’Italie romaine. Essai d’histoire économique d’après les amphores. École française de Rome; Tchernia, A. (2016). The Romans and trade. Oxford: Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723714.001.0001, Vandermersch, C. (1994). Vins et amphores de Grande Grèce et de Sicile IVe–III s. avant J.-C. Centre Jean Bérard; Temin, P. (2001). A market economy in the early Roman empire. Journal of Roman Studies 91, 169-181. doi:10.2307/3184775 Temin, P. (2013). The Roman Market Economy. Princeton University Press; Varriale, I. (2016). Otium and Negotium: The Breakdown of a Boundary in the Imperial Villas. The case study of Pausilypon. In Weissenrieder, A. (Ed.), Borders: terms, ideologies, performances (pp. 283-301). Mohr Siebeck. Volpe, R. (2009). Vino, vigneti et anfore in Roma repubblicana. In Jolivet V, Pavolini C, Temei, M.A.&Volpe, R. (Eds.), SUBURBIUM II: Il suburbio di Roma dalla fine dell’Età monarchica alla nascita del sistema delle ville (V–II secolo a.C.) (pp. 369–381). Ecole Française de Rome. Williams, D.F. (2004). The eruption of Vesuvius and its implications for the early Roman amphora trade with India. In Eiring, J.& Lund, J. (Eds.), Transport amphorae and trade in the Eastern Mediterranean (pp. 441–450). Danish Institute at Athens. Wilson, A.I. (2009a). Approaches to Quantifying Roman Trade. In Bowman A, Wilson A. (Eds.), Quantifying the Roman Economy: Methods and Problems (pp. 213–49). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.003.0009 Wilson, A.I. (2009b). Indicators for Roman economic growth: a response to Walter Scheidel. Journal of Roman Archaeology 22, 71–82. doi:10.1017/S1047759400020596 Wilson, A.I. (2014). Quantifying Roman Economic Performance by Means of Proxies: Pitfalls and Potential. In Callataÿ, F. (Ed.), Quantifying Greco-Roman Economy and beyond (pp. 133–52). Edipuglia. Wilson, A.&Bowman, A.K. (Eds.) (2018). Trade, commerce, and the state in the Roman world. Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198790662.001.0001 Xoplaki, E., Luterbacher, J., Luther, N., Behr, L., Wagner, S., Jungclaus, J., Zorita, E., Toreti, A., Fleitmann, D., Izdebski, A.&Bloomfield, K. (2021). Hydrological Changes in Late Antiquity: Spatio-Temporal Characteristics and Socio-Economic Impacts in the Eastern Mediterranean. In Erdkamp, P., Manning, J.G.&Verboven, K. (Eds.), Climate change and ancient societies in Europe and the Near East: diversity in collapse and resilience (pp. 533-560). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81103-7_18. Footnotes The dataset used is openly available as part of our Github repository: https://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata . https://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata Ex Baetica amphorae II, conference proceedings in preparation. There were, however, case studies regarding Spain, see Reynolds 2010 , and Mediterranean harbours, see Rice 2011 . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 11 Jan, 2025 Read the published version in Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory → Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 28 Oct, 2024 Reviews received at journal 26 Oct, 2024 Reviews received at journal 19 Sep, 2024 Reviews received at journal 13 Sep, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 05 Aug, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 31 Jul, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 30 Jul, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 20 Jul, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 18 Jul, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 17 Jul, 2024 First submitted to journal 16 Jul, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4748698","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":337843228,"identity":"b00fa473-05e0-4528-b3a9-97e87cc6f9c9","order_by":0,"name":"Paulina Komar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Warsaw","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Paulina","middleName":"","lastName":"Komar","suffix":""},{"id":337843229,"identity":"c806595c-7639-4bd8-b00b-823f3c481929","order_by":1,"name":"Tom Brughmans","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Aarhus University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tom","middleName":"","lastName":"Brughmans","suffix":""},{"id":337843230,"identity":"602483c6-2f55-4641-961d-2a84a74ee263","order_by":2,"name":"Ekaterina Borisova","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz GmbH (DFKI)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ekaterina","middleName":"","lastName":"Borisova","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-07-16 09:44:13","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4748698/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4748698/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09686-1","type":"published","date":"2025-01-11T15:57:28+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":62266876,"identity":"339d0305-fe2e-4295-8495-f5ac5dc61308","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:35","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":77070,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSherd frequency, site count and type count results for the entire dataset, using both type dates (black) and context dates (green).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/5e213c0b53d65c29f218f52a.png"},{"id":62266875,"identity":"c13a1e96-5abe-4df2-b17f-9416ccdf2847","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:35","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":44534,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eComparison of the effects of grouping all excavations per settlement (green line) versus keeping individual excavations (black line) on the site count results for the entire dataset, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/3ea14e9aef8f97d3f80c83ac.png"},{"id":62267488,"identity":"5c45b2b5-0276-47f4-a405-41efa2c4b712","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:40:35","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":129769,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns per site type. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/b123f26e01a2cff45e8c6826.png"},{"id":62266889,"identity":"83bba12a-da60-4fd5-bc57-6274709d0a87","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:36","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":146683,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns per typical prime use contents. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/943a7caf707ef23aa164dd9f.png"},{"id":62267492,"identity":"921bba4e-4711-4284-ae05-17846c5d6956","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:40:35","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":123183,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns per eastern provenance. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/9e187dfa5fd44e5c03a0379d.png"},{"id":62268755,"identity":"e41f21a1-8568-4bb8-a0f6-67aee4f83d78","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:48:35","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":145416,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns per western provenance. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/a1331361841d432e657f38d6.png"},{"id":62267489,"identity":"abe983d2-8d2f-4ea4-b6a8-6e87d5b8ebb6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:40:35","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":135162,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns per Italian provenance. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/8af2c6a2a9add68fc69d99eb.png"},{"id":62266879,"identity":"6e182055-f9cc-494d-9381-ac9bdf831bdc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:35","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":53978,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns for all sites in the city of Roma, of sherd frequency (left) and type count (right) results, using both type dates (black) and context dates (red).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/61f823933fa1d09be7d8d8c9.png"},{"id":62267491,"identity":"ae610918-8590-43b6-8d6a-60ac8ef63bde","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:40:35","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":55590,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all sites in the city of Roma, of sherd frequency results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage9.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/e784ea7f41dd948090baf197.png"},{"id":62266883,"identity":"d8784d1c-26d1-44de-bc9a-ee9ace38b97d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:35","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"Figure 10","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":100350,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eComparison of patterns for sites from Roma, Ostia, the Bay of Naples, and all other sites in the dataset. Sherd frequency (top) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage10.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/82481491d010c46036cf31c9.png"},{"id":62266884,"identity":"d08dc155-5908-405c-b39b-ad7b76c41e2b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:35","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"Figure 11","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":46308,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all sites in the city of Ostia, of sherd frequency results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/8dde4e9e56b8a3560ee00229.png"},{"id":62266886,"identity":"37491386-d5ef-49f9-867a-a522d49982e7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:35","extension":"png","order_by":12,"title":"Figure 12","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":57122,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all sites in the bay of Naples, of sherd frequency results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage12.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/1c5532b69e72b98b9c040e92.png"},{"id":62266890,"identity":"1be79643-207c-42ef-bbab-ebb5d6a54a77","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:36","extension":"png","order_by":13,"title":"Figure 13","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":58571,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all sites in the dataset excluding those in Roma, Ostia and the bay of Naples, of sherd frequency results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage13.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/32a3d5fe16d2426e0dd81474.png"},{"id":62266888,"identity":"8e2e142d-74da-4cb9-a70c-8e5d4b549f24","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:36","extension":"png","order_by":14,"title":"Figure 14","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":141166,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all Tyrrhenian sites. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage14.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/fb9181894080cf98dbdcbe99.png"},{"id":62267497,"identity":"d0cca406-4fde-4ddf-9fa8-5db5da585b44","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:40:36","extension":"png","order_by":15,"title":"Figure 15","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":136260,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all Adriatic sites. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage15.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/fbd37780fca5f50aba41d5f4.png"},{"id":62267494,"identity":"fb7abcf5-55f0-4d4f-952f-39734c9f244d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:40:36","extension":"png","order_by":16,"title":"Figure 16","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":148939,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all urban type sites. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage16.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/e65d4a8d26520f80e2e7fb3b.png"},{"id":62267525,"identity":"be95c7bd-a425-4311-a90f-00efe859cd57","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:40:38","extension":"png","order_by":17,"title":"Figure 17","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":134559,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all rural type sites. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage17.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/1f556eea78fdc08b09eb4b0f.png"},{"id":62266891,"identity":"8400b81a-7932-47fc-a0ec-15378c0a190a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:36","extension":"png","order_by":18,"title":"Figure 18","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":124776,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of typical prime use content for all urban/harbour type sites. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage18.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/57cb164e5408a3908afaafbc.png"},{"id":62266893,"identity":"32525f36-585f-4215-961f-6d8622edad55","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:37","extension":"jpeg","order_by":19,"title":"Figure 19","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":472565,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of provenance for all amphorae with wine as their typical prime use content. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage19.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/b0236a50db6d50b8a1a525c0.jpeg"},{"id":62266894,"identity":"e4dd2b26-b581-436e-8192-c7884268901d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:39","extension":"png","order_by":20,"title":"Figure 20","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":110997,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of provenance for all amphorae with oil as their typical prime use content. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage20.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/bdcb33390539c7aa252717fb.png"},{"id":62266892,"identity":"90eab2ee-c85a-4d87-924a-8d88f9ce405b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-08-12 09:32:37","extension":"png","order_by":21,"title":"Figure 21","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":111985,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePatterns of provenance for all amphorae with fish sauce as their typical prime use content. Sherd frequency (top), site count (middle) and type count (bottom) results, using both type dates (left) and context dates (right).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage21.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/552077166e89e8f674ec10a5.png"},{"id":73694176,"identity":"3a4a3b0c-1430-4325-bb89-2d4f637f1a9d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-01-13 16:11:55","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":20592028,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4748698/v1/44ffda71-0fe1-4311-9a90-9a94c376a779.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Consumption trends, trading patterns and economic development in Italy across centuries - data analysis of Roman amphorae in a long-term perspective","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe functioning and performance of the ancient economy has long been one of the key debates in Classical Studies. After many years of strong reliance on written sources in this matter (Finley, 1973; Hopkins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1978\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1980\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e: 190\u0026ndash;230), the last two decades have brought a significant turn towards archaeology and the critical quantification of material sources (Saller, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e: 223\u0026ndash;38; De Callata\u0026yuml;, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e: 361\u0026ndash;372; Friesen\u0026amp;Scheidel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e: 61\u0026ndash;91; Scheidel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e: 46\u0026ndash;70; Lo Cascio, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e: 87\u0026ndash;106; Erdkamp, 2015; Kron, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e: 123\u0026ndash;46; Jongman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e: 237\u0026ndash;54; id. 2007 a, b; 2009; 2014: 169\u0026ndash;88; 2017a: 260\u0026ndash;8; 2017b). A number of attempts to understand and quantify movements of goods in antiquity, as well as assessing the volume of trade and nature of market relations have substantially enhanced our understanding of the origins, transport, and consumption of many goods (Bowman\u0026amp;Wilson 2009; Wilson\u0026amp;Bowman, 2018; Franconi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), but there are still many challenges associated with the imperfections of archaeological data, especially regarding how they reflect ancient economic phenomena.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Roman amphorae data analysis results presented in this paper make a significant contribution to our understanding of the economy of the Roman world, providing novel insights into trade in amphorae-borne products. We use a large dataset consisting of 28,851 diagnostic amphora fragments excavated and published from urban and rural sites in central Italy, perform a quantitative data analysis, and make the dataset and data analysis code openly available to allow for scrutiny and replication of our published results. Our analysis focuses on identifying long-term chronological patterns in the distribution and consumption of amphora-borne foodstuffs in Italy, with a particular focus on the consumption of wine, olive oil and fish sauces with diverse provenances. We critically assess the effects of the imperfections and heterogeneity of our dataset by identifying how robust identified data patterns are in light of different dating evidence and site types, and by complementing the identification of major trends in the combined dataset with more in-depth analyses of subsets relevant for the study of specific places such as Ostia, Rome and the Bay of Naples, of specific foodstuffs and provenances. Our results provide important case studies of changing Italian supply networks and economic connections across the Mediterranean over a 1000 year period (400 BCE-600 CE), reflecting phenomena including changing tastes and demands among Italian consumers of goods, changing production centres in Italy and the provinces, and changing economic interdependencies in the Mediterranean.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eData collection\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study is based on published amphora data from 66 individual archaeological excavation sites representing 28 different settlements in central Tyrrhenian and north Adriatic Italy, dated between the 4th c. BCE and the 7th c. CE\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e. These 66 sites were selected because they were argued to be closed contexts, relatively precisely dated, and reliable quantified amphora frequencies are published for them. In addition they provided significant numbers of amphorae, meaning at least several dozens of potsherds, while sites with singular containers or their fragments were excluded due to their lack of representativity. Our data collection aimed to include as many sites as possible in the study area, representing both coastal and inland centres situated on the north and south as well as east and west of Italy. The chosen sites represent both urban, harbour and rural contexts, though the former are considerably more represented and they provided higher numbers of pottery sherds.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis paper concentrates on numbers of diagnostic fragments of transport jars (rims, bases, and handles - RBH), that were published for each site, as this is the most commonly used method of calculating pottery sherds, contrary to minimum number of individuals - MNI, maximum number of individuals - MAX or estimated number of vessels - EVE, which cannot always be approximated (or as in the case of MAX have only been used by few scholars, e.g. Ehmig, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). A comparable quantitative data analysis by Franconi et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e with description) on amphorae from Germania revealed that using RBH and NMI in most cases provides similar general results, while MAX shows some different trends (because MAX is only used for a handful of sites). In this paper we will use published RBH frequencies consistently, and results should be interpreted as such. However, these still remain frequencies of diagnostic sherds and are therefore most representative of attested typological diversity than of consumption volume. For this reason, we do not merely perform queries of amphora frequencies but equally of typological diversity and the numbers or sites at which they are attested (i.e. their distribution).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe database includes 28,851 diagnostic fragments of amphorae from all over the Mediterranean representing 204 individual types. Each entry in our database represents a unique combination of amphora type excavated at a certain site, and its published RBH frequency. Each amphora type is accompanied with a geographic origin (Tyrrhenian, Adriatic, Aegean, Oriental, Cypriot/Cilician, Egyptian, African, Tripolitanian, Lusitanias, Tarraconesian, Baetican, Spanish, Gaulish) as well as the typical \u0026lsquo;content\u0026rsquo;, which records its most commonly carried product (wine, olive oil, olives, fish products, alum, unknown). We use the Southampton Roman amphora database (University of Southampton (2014) Roman Amphorae: a digital resource [data-set]. York: Archaeology Data Service [distributor] \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5284/1028192\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5284/1028192\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e), and other, more recent publications, if possible, as a key reference for both origin and typical content. The origin but especially the typical content are not known in all cases, and these are explicitly marked as \u0026lsquo;unknown\u0026rsquo; in the database. To give an impression of the quantitative impact of these unknown contents we compare data patterns of diverse contents with those of \u0026lsquo;unknown\u0026rsquo; contents. Moreover, a production \u0026lsquo;Start date\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;End date\u0026rsquo; are recorded for every container form, according to their standard typologies (most following the Southampton Database), which are classified as \u0026lsquo;Type dates\u0026rsquo; in our database. Considering that these dates mark when the amphora was produced rather than when it was actually used, they are also accompanied with the \u0026lsquo;Start date\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;End date\u0026rsquo; of the context where the form was discovered - the so-called \u0026lsquo;Site dates\u0026rsquo; on the graphs we present. Sites are identified by their modern names (and if possible ancient names) as well as their function: urban, harbour/urban, rural and unknown. Urban sites clearly predominate in the database \u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;46 entries, and added to this are nine harbour sites (marked in our database as \u0026lsquo;urban/harbour\u0026rsquo;), predominantly from Ostia, but also from the Adriatic part of Italy. There are also 10 rural sites, which include hinterlands close to ancient urban centres and isolated inland settlements, in the neighbourhood of which no bigger ancient centres were discovered. The remaining \u0026lsquo;site\u0026rsquo; was classified as unknown, as it concerns amphorae from different (and quite old) museum collections in Padova, and no information regarding their possible discovery are available. The database includes geographic locations of each site, and whether they are in Adriatic, Tyrrhenian or Central Italy. This database structure allows for it to be compared or merged with other datasets in future synthetic pottery analyses, and the inclusion of each site\u0026rsquo;s URI from the Pleiades gazetteer allows it to be linked to other datasets with this identifier.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe chosen method is not free from the risk of misidentification of amphorae by ceramologists working on it prior to the publication of the archaeological report. In order to minimise this risk we considered mostly recent open access publications for which we could verify the ceramic identifications. However, the aim of this study is to identify large-scale trends that are robust to a certain degree of misidentification, and we therefore consider it inappropriate to interpret the small-scale patterns and variations in our results which are much more sensitive to misidentification. Other problems to be acknowledged include the reuse of amphorae and their replacement with barrels in certain areas. The scale of reuse was likely small but its impact on amphora data patterns should be formally assessed in future studies (Brughmans\u0026amp;Pecci, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), while the use of barrels has only been confirmed for a limited time period and geographic area (Marli\u0026egrave;re, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e; Marli\u0026egrave;re\u0026amp;Torres Costa, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; 2007; Komar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e: 6). Nonetheless, we refer to these possible biases while discussing results of our study further in this paper.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription of all fields in database\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eField Name\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Amphora_type'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommonly used typologies for Amphora type\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'New_type_name'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndicates values in the field \u0026lsquo;Amphora_type\u0026rsquo; that are treated as the same type in the analyses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Amphora_type_merged'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe same as \u0026lsquo;Amphora_type\u0026rsquo; but fields that have a value in \u0026lsquo;New_type_name\u0026rsquo; are updated with that name. Typologies for Amphora type that take into account grouped types from \u0026lsquo;New_type_name\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Provenance'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA region where an amphora was produced:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. adriatic italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. baetica\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. tyrrhenian italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. gaul\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5. aegean\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e6. spain\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e7. unknown\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e8. aegean/oriental\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e9. africa\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e10. pergamon\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e11. anatolia\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e12. crete\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e13. rhodes\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e14. cyprus/cilicia\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e15. south italy/EM\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e16. lusitania\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e17. tarraconesis\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e18. Africa/sicily\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e19. calabria/sicilia\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e20. orient\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e21. palestina\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e22. tripolitania\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e23. sicilia\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e24. italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e25. italy - tiber valley\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e26. cilicia\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e27. spain/sfrica\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e28. ionian\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e29. sardegna\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e30. italy/sicilia\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e31. black sea\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e32. ibisa\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e33. egypt\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e34. sicilia/italy/western mediterranean\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e35. western mediterranean\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e36. nan\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Content'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA product carried in an amphora:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. wine\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. olive oil\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. fish sauce\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. defrutum\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5. unknown\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e6. nan\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e7. olives\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e8. fruits\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e9. alum\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Site'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA modern name of an archaeological site from which an amphorae assemblage came\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Site_type'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA site category:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. urban\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. urban/harbour\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. rural\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. unknown\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Grouped_sites'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA grouping of the field \u0026lsquo;Site\u0026rsquo; per region or ancient settlement (e.g. grouping all sites in Rome under a single \u0026lsquo;Grouped_sites\u0026rsquo; value \u0026lsquo;Roma\u0026rsquo;)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Amphora_type_lower_date'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efloat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA production start date of an amphora\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Amphora_type_upper_date'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efloat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA production end date of an amphora\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Lower_context_date'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efloat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA consumption start date of an amphora\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Upper_context_date'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efloat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA consumption end date of an amphora\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Frequency'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efloat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn amphora frequency\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Pleiades URI'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSite geographical coordinates according to the Pleiades Atlas\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Latitude'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efloat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSite geographical coordinates in latitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Longitude'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003efloat\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSite geographical coordinates in longitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Tyrrhenian_vs_Adriatic'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndication of whether the site is on the Tyrrhenian, Adriatic or Central regions of Italy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. Tyrrhenian\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. Adriatic\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Central, but better connected with the Adriatic region\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. Central\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Publication'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBibliographic reference for assemblage publication\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Period'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategorical indication of site chronology in Roman historical period:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. MR/LR (middle Republication to late Republican)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. LR (late Republican)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. LR/EI (late Republican to early Imperial)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. EI (early Imperial)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5. EI/LI (early Imperial to late Imperial)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e6. LI (late Imperial)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e7. unknown\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Notes'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGeneral notes on the sites and types\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Site_notes'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNotes and considerations on the site and its location\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Amphora_type_notes'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNotes and considerations on the amphora type or typical prime use contents designation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e'Problems'\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003estring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsiderations of problems related to the type identification and whether they could be merged with other types.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eData analysis methods\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the result section we present outputs of three types of queries (rows in figures): temporal changes in sherd frequency, the number of sites at which amphorae were attested, and the number of amphora types. We generate all three queries using two different sources of dating (columns in figures): ceramic typological dates are considered to be more representative of production patterns, and context dates are considered more representative of consumption patterns. We do this to explore differences in production and consumption patterns, but also to remain critical to how typological and site occupation dating might structure the results.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe queries are performed using a probabilistic aoristic method which divides a frequency equally over each year within a relevant date range (Crema, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Johnson, 2003), a method that has been used before in Roman archaeology to explore temporal patterns in ceramic datasets (Fentress\u0026amp;Perkins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e; Franconi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). This method is explained and applied in a previous study by some of the authors on Roman amphorae in Germania (Franconi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) and we use the same implementation of queries here. The queries are implemented in Python and openly available in iPython notebooks per figure to enable replication of all results and figures.\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sherd frequency results using type dates are produced by dividing the frequency of an amphora type over the years of the standard typo-chronological date range of that amphora type, and summing up all results per year. The sherd frequency results using context dates are produced by dividing the frequency of all sherds in a dated context by the number of years in that site\u0026rsquo;s contextual date range, and summing up all results per year. As stated above, we believe the sherd frequency results are most sensitive to selection, survival and publication biases. We therefore interpret the sherd frequency temporal patterns as descriptions of the available published data, and not as direct reflections of traded volumes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe believe the site count and amphora type count queries to produce more robust results in light of known biases. The site count queries using type dates are produced by counting the number of sites per year that have evidence of any amphora type for which that year is within its typo-chronological date range. The site count queries using context dates are produced by counting the number of sites per year that have evidence of any amphora type and where the year in question is within the context\u0026rsquo;s date range. These site count queries give us a good description of general temporal trends in the width of distribution of amphorae: periods in which certain amphorae were present in many places, and periods when they had a more restricted distribution.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe amphora type count queries using type dates are produced by counting per year the number of different amphora types for which that year is within its typo-chronological date range. This query gives a good description of temporal trends in the frequency of amphora types that were produced. The amphora type count queries using context dates are produced by counting the number of different amphora types per year, where that year is within the context\u0026rsquo;s date range of the context where the amphora type was found. These two queries give a good description of the general temporal trends in the number of amphora types that were respectively produced or consumed: periods when more amphora types circulated, and periods when fewer amphora types were deposited at sites.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eWe present new results on patterns of trade in amphora-borne foodstuffs in Central Italy as well as chronological trends in the consumption of wine, olive oil and fish sauces of various provenances and destinations. In this section we first describe general patterns in the database as a whole, which is followed in the next section by a more detailed description of trends. These patterns allow us to trace a number of important economic phenomena, such as changes in Italian and provincial supply and demand as well as changing commercial networks in the Mediterranean. A detailed interpretation of how our results reveal these phenomena is presented in the subsequent \u003cspan refid=\"Sec8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003ediscussion\u003c/span\u003e section.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eEffects of dating evidence and site grouping\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe overall chronological patterns following type dates and context dates, though similar in a broader perspective, differ in their details. In Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ea we see that using context dates shows a dramatic peak in frequency during the late 1st c. CE. But using the type dates significantly reduces this peak. This pattern points to the overrepresentation of Flavian contexts, especially in Rome, which should not be interpreted as a period of particular increase in amphora importations beyond what the peak of \u0026ldquo;type dates\u0026rdquo; shows. The frequency lines are overall very similar, however, which means that most of the Mediterranean foodstuffs were consumed in Italy from the beginning until the end of the life of their commercial packaging (i.e. the amphorae). Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eb shows the comparison between the two dating methods when considering the count of sites at which amphorae are present. The line reflecting type dates suggests that the distribution width of amphorae in Italy experienced a dramatic increase in the early second century BCE and a similarly abrupt fall around the late third and early fourth century CE. However, the distribution width is rather different when using context dates for the same amphora data: we notice a dramatic growth around 150 BCE), while the fall in distribution occurs as early as 200 CE. Although most amphora types were produced until c. 300 CE, their consumption in Italy stopped abruptly at the end of the 2nd c. CE, which suggests a consumption crisis associated with factors other than political and economic instability during the 3rd c. CE. Perhaps consumption trends in Italy changed earlier than in the rest of the Mediterranean and it may suggest a different pace of economic development for different parts of the empire. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ec shows more similarity in the comparison between the two dating methods when considering the diversity of amphora forms in the sample, and revealing a higher diversity of amphora types in the early imperial period.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough neither dating method is without issues, this comparison of their results allows us to identify patterns that are visible no matter what dating method is used, and patterns that are very sensitive to the choice of the dating method. Having such a quantitative understanding of the impact of these dating methods on the results is crucial for enabling an appropriate interpretation in the \u003cspan refid=\"Sec8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003ediscussion\u003c/span\u003e section.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo matter which method of dating we choose (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ea, b, c), all graphs show us similar general patterns (with the exception of the distribution width: Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eb). We observe an overall increase in amphorae in Italy from 200 BCE, which accelerated considerably during the 1st c. BCE. The period between 100\u0026ndash;200 CE experienced the highest frequency, distribution and diversity of transport containers.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, all graphs show a general decrease in frequency (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ea), site count (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eb) and type count after 200\u0026ndash;300 CE. The 50% drop, or even more than 90% in the case of the frequency graph, might point to a dramatic shrinking of the Italian economy towards the end of the Empire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll site count results presented in this paper concern counts of settlements (e.g. Pompeii) and not individual excavations within that settlement (e.g. Casa di Ariadna). But what is the impact on these site counts of grouping excavations within settlements together? Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e demonstrates that the patterns are the same, but their magnitude is different. This is hardly surprising given our dataset consists of 66 excavations at 28 settlements, and grouping the same ceramic data together will merely result in a reduction in the magnitude of the pattern by roughly 40 sites. We argue that it is most meaningful to present and interpret results for settlement counts rather than excavation counts throughout.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eDeposition settlement type\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe remainder of our results focus on three major substantive avenues of investigation: deposition settlement type (urban, harbour or rural; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), typical content (wine, olive oil or fish products; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) and vessel origin (e.g. Italy, Aegean, \u0026hellip;; Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e reveals comparable patterns of deposited ceramics at different site types, suggesting consumption and distribution diversity were comparable at different site types across Italy. Regardless of site type, the highest volumes and most diversified foodstuffs were consumed during the early Imperial period, and all experienced late Republican increase in consumption and late 2nd/early 3rd c. decrease which lasted until the end of the Empire. However, there are a few differences between the site types\u0026rsquo; patterns. Most striking is the clear difference in magnitude, mostly reflecting the number of sites of each type (Urban\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;20 grouped sites, corresponding to 46 individual sites; Urban/harbour\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;3 grouped sites, corresponding to 9 individual sites; Rural 9 grouped, corresponding to 10 individual sites; Unknown\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Padova varie). This magnitude difference is most striking in the frequency results (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea,b), the late 1st c. CE peak being caused by overrepresentation of urban contexts that were precisely dated to the Flavian period by their construction phases. Type counts show a slightly higher diversity of types in urban centres, especially after 300 CE, but trends in growth and decline follow almost identical shapes for all site types (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ee, f). We also note that rural sites have a much lower frequency and type count diversity compared to urban or urban/harbour sites (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, a-b, e-f), suggesting less diversity in amphora consumption at rural sites but also revealing a lower frequency of ceramics from rural sites having been published. Finally, the increase for urban centres started earlier (200 BCE) than in urban/harbour or rural sites (100 BCE) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ea, d), but this should be associated with the fact that no rural or urban/harbour contexts dated before 150 BCE are present in the database.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTypical content\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e also shows similar patterns for wine, olive oil and fish products, though the former were the earliest to reach Italy. Wine carried in amphorae (the so called \u0026lsquo;Greco-Italic\u0026rsquo; produced at the beginning in the south of the Apennine Peninsula and later in Campania and Adriatic Italy) appeared in central Italy already during the 4th c. BCE in very small volumes, while fish products and olive oil started to arrive c. 200 years later. From the perspective of amphora frequency and type count (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea, b, e, f) it is clear that wine amphorae were most common and diversified, especially during the Republican period. At the same time, wine is present at comparable numbers of sites as oil and fish amphorae (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ec, d).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eImported olive oil and fish-sauces started to appear in Italy during the 2nd c. BCE, on a highest number of sites (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ec, d) but until the turn of the eras they were rather rare (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea, b). From the Augustan age until 200 CE the amounts of all the oil and fish amphorae (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea, b) were comparable and their presence in various contexts was equally widespread (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ec, d), and after this date their partial disappearance was parallel. Again, amphora production dates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea, c, e) show less abrupt changes than context dates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003eb, d, f), the latter suggesting more dramatic shifts in consumption patterns of all types of foodstuffs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results demonstrate that there was much more diversity in wine amphorae (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ee, f) compared to containers with other content, which reflects a higher diversity in wine consumption (although the typical content of many types is unknown). This diversity can refer to both geographic origins of wines or their different qualities - literary sources mention many more wine than olive oil or fish sauces varieties in antiquity (Komar 2020: 76\u0026ndash;127; Komar \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e: 14\u0026ndash;17). On the other hand, the typological variation of wine amphorae is higher than the diversity of olive oil or garum jars. Therefore, some issues related with typological variations of amphora forms and their classification may also be responsible for these differences (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ee, f).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eVessel origin\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study clearly demonstrates that Italy imported goods from all over the Mediterranean, the main supplying provinces being: the Aegean, Africa, Baetica, Gaul and Sicily. What concerns imports from the east, (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e) Aegean amphorae arrived earliest, appearing from 200 BCE. During the mid-2nd c. BCE they were followed by Tripolitanian imports, while other Oriental (Levantine, Egyptian, Cypriot and Cilician) and Anatolian products appeared at the turn of the eras. Aegean amphorae are most frequent among the eastern imports, and were also attested on a considerably higher number of sites than other types of containers (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ec, d). Anatolian, Tripolitanian and Oriental amphorae are less attested in Italy (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ea, b), but they retained their limited distribution and diversity (albeit in small volumes) when those of Aegean amphorae declined in various contexts starting from the 3rd c. CE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ec-f). During this period they also became much more diversified, exceeding the diversity of Aegean products, as indicated by the type count (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ee, f).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e shows results for amphorae of Western Mediterranean origins. All started to appear in Italy after 200 BCE, while their numbers, diversity and distribution grew considerably at the late 1st c. BCE (using production dates) or early 1st c. CE (using consumption days). Baetican products had the highest frequency and they were also most widely attested on different sites in Italy until 200 CE, but after this date they almost disappeared giving way to African containers. They were followed by Lusitanian and Calabrian/Sicilian amphorae. A considerable change in Italian supply may be observed after 200 CE, when all imports decrease significantly. Imports from the Iberian Peninsula and Gaul disappeared from the record, either by the change in container type (from amphorae to barrels) or a breakdown in production capacities in the West during the 3rd century. This makes African, Lusitanian and Calabrian/Sicilian goods the most common on the market, but even though they were quite widespread in different parts of the Apennine Peninsula, their combined numbers constitute only a small percentage of Baetican imports during the Early Empire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfrican types were the most diverse starting from the first century CE, as shown by Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003ee, f, especially during the late Imperial period. However, the high diversity of African containers during the late Imperial period, cannot only be interpreted as reflecting high diversity of African products on the Italian market, but should rather be associated with typological issues - in Keay\u0026rsquo;s typology (Kaey, 1984) many forms exist in several variants, which points to a lack of standardisation rather than deliberate actions (see e.g. Keay 61 Type, Variants A, B, C \u0026amp; D or Keay 62, A, D, E, Q \u0026amp; R).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn the following sections we place these results in a broader context and explore their implications for Roman economic history. This will be done in six parts, starting from the broad trends revealed above and their economic implications, followed by more in-depth evaluations of production and consumption patterns in different parts of Italy:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003col\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eEconomic development in Italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eProduction of export goods in Italy and Sicily\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRome: exception or rule?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption in the rest of Italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e \u003cspan\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSupply of foodstuffs to Italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1. Economic development in Italy\u003c/h2x\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study clearly shows that amphora-borne staples were present in Italy in considerable quantities and diversity between 200 BCE and 500 CE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). However, a significant increase in the Frequency and Site count curves can be observed during the 2nd and 1st c. BCE, they remain stable until c. 200/300 CE and after this date they fall to the levels of the middle Republican period and stay low until the end of our period of study. From the perspective of the consumption dates, this trend demonstrates a real boom in importing foodstuffs to Italy between c. 100 BCE and 200 CE. But both the flow and ebb of amphorae were dramatic, which suggests that there must have been sudden changes in trade and consumption patterns in Italy throughout the Roman Imperial period.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe overall pattern mirrors what has been observed for other archaeological proxies of economic growth - a general growth in urbanisation and mining activity in the Mediterranean (De Callata\u0026yuml;, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Scheidel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e; McConnell et al., 2021; Hanson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e: 95\u0026ndash;6), a construction boom in Italy and Germany (Jongman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007b\u003c/span\u003e: 615; 2007a: 189\u0026ndash;90, graph 3 and 4; 2009; 2014: 174\u0026ndash;5, Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.), production boom suggested by increase in wine and olive presses and garum factories (Wilson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR101\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e: 158, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e; Marzano, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013b\u003c/span\u003e: 133\u0026ndash;4, Fig.\u0026nbsp;5.12 and 5.13; 2013a; 2015) and a consumption boom, which was well documented especially in Italy (Santangeli Valenziani\u0026amp;Volpe, 2012: 66\u0026ndash;7; Volpe, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR95\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e: 379\u0026ndash;81; Jongman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007a\u003c/span\u003e: 189\u0026ndash;90, graph 3 and 4; id. 2014: 174\u0026ndash;5, Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e; De Ruyt, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e: 178\u0026ndash;9; Komar, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). All of these phoenomena started around the Augustan age and lasted until the late 2nd c. CE.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis pattern, reflected most clearly by a Site count (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003eb), can be compared with models of economic growth in the Roman Empire. There is a consensus among scholars that aggregate economic growth occurred between the late Republican age and the 2nd c. CE, but its nature and scale are still debated (Hopkins, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1978\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1980\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e: 190\u0026ndash;230; Saller, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e: 223\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;38; De Callata\u0026yuml;, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e: 361\u0026ndash;372; Friesen\u0026amp;Scheidel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e: 61\u0026ndash;91; Scheidel, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e: 46\u0026ndash;70; Lo Cascio, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e: 87\u0026ndash;106; Erdkamp, 2015; Kron, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e: 123\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;46; Jongman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e: 237\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;54; 2014: 169\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;88; 2017a: 260-8). For example, certain scholars argue that the growth was rather moderate and unsustainable, stopped by population growth (Saller, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR83\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Scheidel, 2007: 332\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;46; 2009: 46\u0026ndash;70), while others presume its sustainability, blaiming external factors (epidemics or ill-guided policies of the emperors) for the economic contraction (Silver, 2007: 191\u0026ndash;252, especially 236-9; Temin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e: 220\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;39). Our results, demonstrating the abrupt and huge increase in imports from all over the Mediterranean suggest that gross growth probably took place in most parts of the empire during the late Republican and early imperial period. Rapid enrichment of the inhabitants of Italy as a consequence of the conquest of new territories, war booties and incomes from new investments during the last years of the Republic, postulated by Scheidel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e) offers a potential explanation of the consumption boom on the Apennine Peninsula. However, it also seems that the Roman conquest, unification of the Empire and capital brought by the Roman elites positively influenced the productivity in the provinces.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Aegean region and the Iberian Peninsula, Baetica in particular, were the most productive regions of the Empire until the 3rd c. AD, but they gave way to Africa during Late Antiquity. The quantities of Spanish goods, mostly Baetican olive oil, but also wine from Tarraconensis and fish sauces from Lusitania highlighting the special role that the Iberian Peninsula and especially the province of Baetica played in Italian supply. It should be emphasised that the consumption boom during the late Republic and early Empire regarded Aegean wines and Baetican olive oil in particular. Aegean imports were not only the earliest Eastern amphorae to arrive in Italy, but also the most numerous (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ea, b), the most widespread along the Apennine Peninsula (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ec, d) and the most diverse (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ee, f). This confirms the suggestions of other scholars, according to which Greece was a main Italian vineyard (Komar, 2020), as Egypt was its granary. Considering that Baetican olive oil was the second product among those that most largely contributed to the consumption boom, the role of this province as an olive oil warehouse for Italy and Rome in particular, already suggested by the discoveries from Monte Testaccio (E.g. Remesal Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; 2018; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR75\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), now seems even more pronounced. Nevertheless, the position of Baetica is not as dominant among western amphorae as the role of the Aegean area among Eastern Mediterranean amphorae, which suggests that the supply from the west, which included considerable amounts of Gallic and African products, was more even and diversified than the supply from the east.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter 200 CE the Aegean provisions broke abruptly and the share of goods from the rest of the Eastern Mediterranean in Italian supply became almost equal. The diversity and distribution width of Oriental, Anatolian and Tripolitanian amphorae in Italy did not change much between the early and late imperial period (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003ec, d, e, f), despite the fact that after the 3rd c. AD the demand was considerably smaller as a consequence of wars, depopulation, movement of the capital and a general instability (O\u0026rsquo;Donnel, 2009, 48; Durliat, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e, 117, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e; Russel, 1958: 73). It seems therefore, that the Italian consumption shrinkage affected mostly the Aegean imports, or that this part of the Mediterranean experienced the strongest problems in surplus creation and was no longer able to satisfy the demand in the centre of the Empire. At the same time, the considerable decrease of Baetican olive oil imports (and other products from the Iberian Peninsula) on Italian market cannot easily be interpreted in the similar manner due to the barrel issue, but the political instability in the West postulated by a number of other studies (Keay, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1988\u003c/span\u003e: 173\u0026ndash;178), inclines to acceptance of the hypothesis regarding the shrinkage of the export economy of the Iberian Peninsula during Late Antiquity (Funari, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e: 99\u0026ndash;101). Moreover the frequency curves (especially at Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrate that even though Africa dominated the late antique supply, its capacity for provisions should not be overestimated. All products from Africa during Late Antiquity hardly reached a half of Aegean wines or Baetican olive oil imported during the early Empire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt seems that population growth in Italy was not able to devour the general wealth for over 200 years of the Principate, as the numbers of imported products suggest wellbeing and stability, which was only broken at the turn of the 2nd and 3rd c. CE. The decrease in amphora frequency is too abrupt and dramatic to be explained as a result of natural factors. Sudden, external shocks, such as plagues (of the Antonines and Cyprian), which caused the economic problems in the Empire (McConnell et al., 2021), seem a better fit with the amphora data. Therefore, the results of this study corroborate better with the assumption that there was a sustainable development in the Roman economy and that it was stopped by external factors.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, our aggregated data from terrestrial sites can be compared with the shipwreck curve created by Parker and later analysed by Wilson (Parker, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e; Wilson, 2009 a, b). Numbers of shipwrecks diminished in the early 2nd c. CE, that means a century earlier than frequencies of amphorae. Our study, therefore, agrees with the assumption that the decrease in the number of attested shipwrecks was due to other reasons than the collapse of trade and cannot be seen as an indicator of Roman economic performance during this century (Wilson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR99\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009a\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR100\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009b\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR101\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003eb demonstrates a 3rd c. decrease in imports and then a small recovery during the 4th and 5th centuries, which, however, cannot be compared with late Republican and early Imperial prosperity. We could, thus, suggest the following hypothetical scenario: the sustainable economic growth in Italy was stopped by the Antonine plague and then strengthened by the crisis of the 3rd Century (civil wars and barbarian raids, Cyprian plague etc.). The attempts to restore the Italian well-being were probably impeded in Late Antiquity by climate change (Harper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e. But new data does not allow to link economic and population changes with the climate, see Roberts et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Xoplaki et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR103\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), but they cannot be properly approached using amphora statistics due to the use of barrels, which became much more popular during Late Antiquity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe type count (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003ec) shows that there was a higher diversity of amphora types in the early imperial period, coinciding with a supposed period of economic development. More amphora diversity means more variability in offer for consumers and potentially more competition on the market. This diversity could indicate an increased prosperity reflected in an increased ability to import from diverse regions, but also potentially a decentralisation and freedom of choice which would not exist if only foodstuffs from one or few producing regions were available. Obviously, a wider variety of amphora types per se is too little to argue about the prevalence of free market commercial transactions over the coerced transfers, but the correlation of this pattern with the period of economic growth is of interest. Interpreting the decrease in diversity of amphora types during Late Antiquity is difficult since it is obscure whether the pattern reveals certain market changes in variability of goods or is simply caused by the use of barrels, which replaced many amphora types. The results presented in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e show that the consumption levels grew between 200 BCE and 200 CE all over Italy and that the pattern was similar for urban, harbour and rural areas. The magnitude of the growth and decline, however, varies depending on whether we count the number of sites of each type and the number of ceramics published per site type. Overall, this means that imported foodstuffs were available not only to the urban inhabitants of big cities or the ports that received supplies for these cities, but also to people living in the country. Therefore, smallholder farmers living in distant areas of the Apennine Peninsula, commonly seen as very self-reliant for their subsistence, had access to imported goods. This suggests that the economic growth indicated by the scale of imports was not unevenly distributed and not limited only to imperial and municipal elites, which could indicate that it had a \u003cem\u003eper capita\u003c/em\u003e character. This agrees with other studies emphasising an early Imperial wellbeing of the inhabitants of Italy (Kron, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e: 70\u0026ndash;1, 77\u0026ndash;8; Jongman, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007b\u003c/span\u003e: 608\u0026ndash;9; 2007a: 194, graph 7; Kron, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e: 129; contra Wilson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR100\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009b\u003c/span\u003e: 74; Wilson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR101\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e: 149, 156; Koepke, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Harper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e: 77, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.3 and Jongman et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). An important caveat is provided by the much more limited diversity of types at rural settlements (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003ee-f), suggesting their inhabitants had access to less diverse foodstuffs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs mentioned above, the earlier influx of imported goods registered in urban areas cannot be interpreted by an assumption that people inhabiting Roman cities got access to imported goods earlier than villagers, and especially workers associated with harbour facilities (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003eb). This just shows that earlier contexts were distinguished in the cities, which are so far lacking in other types of sites, as it would have been illogical to assume that no imports reached ports via which the cities were supplied.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is worth mentioning that all types of sites experienced a decrease of imports after 200 AD, which demonstrates that the 3rd c. crisis and late antique \u0026lsquo;recession\u0026rsquo; had a similar impact on urban and rural areas, at least in terms of accessibility of imported foodstuffs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. Production of export goods in Italy and Sicily\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eItaly not only consumed goods imported from the provinces, but also produced high volumes of wine and olive oil, which were exported during the late Republic mostly to Gaul (wine), military camps on the German limes, the Eastern Mediterranean and even as far as India (Gupta, Williams\u0026amp;Peacock \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Lawall, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Tchernia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e, 276\u0026ndash;296; Franconi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Nonetheless, during the early Empire these surpluses largely remained on the Apennine Peninsula due to the increased demand for foodstuffs. We therefore zoom in on the consumption of different Italian amphorae to explore economic conditions and the pace of development of different parts of the Apennine Peninsula (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). Sicily, although it is clearly a province, is included here, because of challenges the attribution of the provenance of a few amphora types, especially Dr 21\u0026ndash;22 and Keay 52, which were produced both on the island and in south Italy, most probably in Bruttium and Calabria (Panella\u0026amp;Rizzo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e, 135\u0026ndash;149).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe inner part of the Apennine Peninsula was almost insignificant in terms of supply in amphora borne-goods, and only the Tyrrhenian and Adriatic facades and the Tiber Valley were regions that allowed for large-scale regional and pan-Mediterranean export of their staple goods. Production of surpluses for export started earlier in western Italy, but in the eastern part it was more intensive during the early Empire. Only these Adriatic and Tyrrhenian products gained popularity all over Italy, whilst other amphorae had a limited distribution (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003ec-d) and (except from Sicilian) diversity (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003ee-f).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTyrrhenian Greco-Italic forms appeared from 350 BCE and were accompanied by other types of Italian production. Starting from the turn of the era, Adriatic amphorae became more frequent and typologically more diverse than Tyrrhenian ones (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e), especially on the sites situated on the eastern part of Italy, and their predominance continued until the early 2nd c. CE. However, in this period Tyrrhenian amphorae were present on slightly higher numbers of sites than Adriatic amphorae were (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e, c-d). Tyrrhenian and Adriatic amphorae patterns suddenly drop after 200 CE. It seems that some Tyrrhenian and Adriatic amphorae continued to be produced in the 3rd c. CE and they were exported abroad, e.g. Dressel 2\u0026ndash;4 jars discovered near Hadrian\u0026rsquo;s Wall (Arthur, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e, 245; Arthur\u0026amp;Williams, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1992\u003c/span\u003e, 253\u0026ndash;254; Williams, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR98\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e, 449), but their consumption in Italy almost ceased. Amphorae produced in the Tiber Valley (\u0026lsquo;di Spello\u0026rsquo; type) were in use between the second half of the 1st and 2nd c. CE, but their distribution width was not particularly high. It seems that the export of wine from the Tiber Valley was limited mostly to supply Rome and its neighbourhood. According to Tchernia (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR90\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e: 81\u0026ndash;82), the Tiber Valley blossomed as a wine exporter during the crisis in Campanian viticulture caused by the eruption of Vesuvius. Our results show that amphorae from the Tiber Valley remained in circulation until the economic breakdown of the late 2nd and early 3rd c. CE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e). Containers from Sicily and south Italy were rare throughout the whole antiquity, but remained in production and consumption after 300 CE (e.g. Calabrian/Sicilian type Keay 52) when most other Italian productions ceased being widely distributed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results reflect that the biggest consumption centres, such as Rome and the Po Valley, gave impulse to surplus production in the neighbouring Tyrrhenian and Adriatic areas. This production was moreover exported outside of Italy. When it ceded (at least based on amphora evidence), new production areas entered the stage, such as south Italy and Sicily - the distribution of flat-bottom containers in Sicily and the Mediterranean shows that during the Early Roman period their supply was limited to a few places in Sicily, a few in Tyrrhenian Italy and Gallia Narbonensis, while only in late Roman times the distribution pattern changed to pan-Sicilian and pan-Mediterranean (Franco \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e, especially Fig.\u0026nbsp;7.4\u0026ndash;7.8).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe continuing presence in Italy of the wine of \u003cem\u003eBrutti\u003c/em\u003e (Keay 52 amphorae of Calabrian/Sicilian origin), praised by Cassiodorus as a delicacy (Cassiod. \u003cem\u003eVariae\u003c/em\u003e XII 12), might have been the result of the outflow of Egyptian grain to Constantinople and the later Vandal conquest of Africa, which caused the growing demand for Sicilian grain, and probably other products from the region, which was becoming gradually important for the Roman nobility. On the other hand, the appearance of the Keay 52 type further correlates with the Aurelian-era distributions of wine for Rome\u0026rsquo;s inhabitants - they are the only Italian wines transported in amphorae during this period, which, according to some scholars, links them with \u003cem\u003ecanon vinarius\u003c/em\u003e paid by these areas after their inclusion to \u003cem\u003eVicariato Suburbicario (\u003c/em\u003ePacetti, 1998; Panella, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e, 646; 2001, 180, 196; 2017, 114).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Rome - exception or a rule?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe city of Rome is often considered an exceptional urban community in the Mediterranean - the Empire\u0026rsquo;s hub to which all roads led. It was the biggest centre of consumption, with imperial elites among its inhabitants, and particularly well connected with the rest of the Mediterranean. The so called \u0026lsquo;primitivist\u0026rsquo; theories assume that big cities, such as Rome, Alexandria, Ephesus and Carthage, received more imports than ordinary settlements, but that these patterns were exceptional (Finley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e: 123\u0026ndash;149; Bang, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e: 142, 297\u0026ndash;298). Is this reflected by amphora production and consumption patterns?\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe frequency and type count curves from Rome (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e) show the same general pattern as the dataset as a whole: the appearance of amphorae c. 400 BCE, an increase in the 2nd and 1st c. BCE, peak in the 1st c. CE and the sudden and almost constant decrease in frequency and diversity after 200 CE (but a higher type diversity in the late Imperial times than during the late Republic). This similarity is not surprising, since the frequency of evidence from Rome constitutes 49% of the entire dataset and therefore plays an important part in shaping the overall pattern (14,145 out of 28,851). The amplitude is much bigger while looking at context dates than when considering only type dates, but as mentioned above this is associated with a high number of contexts that could be precisely dated to the narrow period of the Flavian rule. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e demonstrates that wine amphorae were not only the most common, but also the earliest to be imported to Rome. Olive oil and fish sauce containers were not attested in larger quantities before the turn of the eras and they reached a peak during the early Imperial age. Olive oil jars disappeared gradually after 300 CE, while fish sauce jars remained until at least 400 CE, but after 200 CE their quantities dropped considerably. In comparison to the overall dataset patterning (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea-b), wine is even more dominant in relation to other contents.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNevertheless, the lack of considerable differences in the amphora curve for Rome as compared to the pattern established for the whole dataset suggests a couple of important potential research issues. First of all, it seems that what happened in Rome did not stay in Rome, but was soon mirrored all over Italy, albeit possibly on a smaller scale. The consumption habits of the Roman ruling elite, at least in terms of types and provenance of wine, olive and fish products, did not considerably differ from the habits of the rest of Italy. This corroborates with Rowan\u0026rsquo;s studies of sewers in Pompeii, which show that the diet of the wealthy did not differ in principles of the diet of the poor (Rowan, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR81\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), as well as with the results of the research in Portus (O\u0026rsquo;Connell et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e: 731). Secondly, we should ask a question whether it was inhabitants of Italy that imitated the consumption patterns of the Romans or the other way round. For example, there is evidence that wine from Crete became very popular in Campania around half a century before it flooded the tables of the inhabitants of the \u003cem\u003eUrbs\u003c/em\u003e (Komar, 2020: 179). Finally, it seems that Rome, although definitely exceptional as the seat of the emperor, senate and elite, might have behaved as an ordinary city in other aspects, i.e. consumption of basic foodstuffs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, since the research regarding the city of Rome has been the most scrutinised it allows us for a better understanding on certain trends observed in our amphorae curves. For example, the reduction in amphora frequency after 200\u0026ndash;300 CE could be associated with a drop in demand for foodstuffs. It is assumed that during the 2nd c. CE the city had a population of roughly one million inhabitants, which decreased to 800,000 around 400 CE, while the transfer of the capital to Ravenna and Constantinople as well as the Vandal raids might have resulted in the population shrinking to just 100,000 by 500 CE (O\u0026rsquo;Donnel, 2009: 48). Other estimates are even more pessimistic, setting the Roman population during the 5th c. CE at 350,000 and during the 6th c. CE at a mere 60,000 inhabitants (Durliat, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1990\u003c/span\u003e: 117, Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e), or even as little as 58,000 around 419 CE (Russel, 1958: 73).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe change in amphorae patterns during Late Antiquity could also reflect changing consumption habits. A part of \u0026lsquo;old\u0026rsquo; Roman elites moved to Ravenna and Constantinople, and new elites with possible different consumption habits appeared in Italy. The development of Christianity encouraging fasting and ascetic practices among devotees might have also influenced the decrease in demand, wine in particular (but wine used during the Eucharist was still needed and might have levelled this decrease), and to a lesser degree also olive oil and fish products. However, we expect such factors would account for a smaller part of the reduction of amphora patterns as compared to the effects of a significant decrease in the city\u0026rsquo;s population size.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. Consumption patterns in different areas of Italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e we compare the patterns from Rome with those from sites in Ostia, sites along the Bay of Naples (which includes mostly contexts from the Vesuvian Cities (Pompeii and Stabiae), but also from Naples, Puteoli and Cuma), and all other sites in the dataset. These results allow us to conclude that all areas of Italy had a comparable pattern of growth and decline seen through the consumption of different amphora-borne products, but with some differences in amplitudes. For example, Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003ea-b clearly demonstrate how Rome makes up about 49% of frequency in the database, and allows us to explore how the pattern of Rome differs from that in other areas. Frequency graphs organised according to amphora production dates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003ea) show that all areas imported goods according to the same general pattern, but we can notice that the frequency peak in \u0026lsquo;Other\u0026rsquo; started slightly earlier, that means already in the late 1st c. BCE and early 1st c. CE. On the other hand, this earlier increase is less pronounced when looking at site dates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003eb) or type count (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003ec, d). The highest diversity of amphora types is attested in Rome, but Ostia, especially during the 1st c. CE almost reached Roman levels. The Bay of Naples has the lowest diversity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe highest diversity of products in the capital is perfectly understandable, as this is what we also observe in modern times - the largest diversity of consumers lives in big cities, which is why the widest variety of goods is necessary in order to satisfy their demand. The main function of Ostia was to supply Rome, which is why the variety of goods attested there was comparable. However, despite attempts in magnifying the capacity of \u003cem\u003ePortus\u003c/em\u003e, it was not able to receive all the goods that the capital demanded, which is why it soon started to specialise in receiving western products, while the eastern reached Puteoli in Campania (Pavolini, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1996\u003c/span\u003e: 228\u0026ndash;230; Komar, 2020: 159). This also explains the lower diversity of products in the Bay of Naples - only eastern goods were common and popular there. Considering that Campania produced plenty of high quality agricultural goods, so needed less imports, only a small part of western commodities reached this area (e.g. for special demands of certain consumers or simply incidentally).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe will now explore the consumption patterns of typical contents for Ostia, the Bay of Naples and all other Italian sites (Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e). Wine amphorae were significantly more frequent and diverse in Ostia than olive oil or fish sauce containers (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e). This reflects the pattern observed for Rome (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e). Imports of olive oil and fish sauces reached Ostia from the 2nd c. BCE, but since numbers of wine amphorae increased during this period, for fish sauce amphorae the growth started in the late 1st c. BCE, while for olive oil jars in the 1st c. CE. Imports peaked in the first century CE and declined after the second century. This suggests that Ostia became an important reloading place for Roman supply starting from the beginning of the Empire and remained such until the 2nd/3rd c. CE. This peak period also coincides with the infrastructure investments of Augustus, Claudius and Trajan in the neighbouring harbour of Portus (Meiggs, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1973\u003c/span\u003e; Giuliani, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; Boetto\u0026amp;Bukowiecki, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). It should be mentioned that there are few contexts in Ostia dated to Late Antiquity so it is difficult to understand what exactly happened after the 3rd c. CE.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe frequency curve for the Bay of Naples (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) differs considerably from the general pattern for the whole of the Apennine Peninsula (but it is important to note that this frequency graph is based on just 3% of all sherds, a summed ceramic frequency for the Bay of Naples of 866). The frequency peak occurred 100\u0026ndash;200 years earlier - in the late Republican period and not in the early Imperial period (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003eb). This pattern is best reflected when using site dates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003eb) rather than type dates: the former reflects better the fact that the Vesuvian cities were not occupied after the eruption in 79 CE and the crisis in Campanian production caused by this event (Tchernia, 2011: 113\u0026thinsp;\u0026minus;\u0026thinsp;14). The frequency curve based on type dates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003ea) roughly agrees with the general pattern, established for Italy as a whole, except for an earlier higher peak in wine amphora frequency, which equals the Imperial levels. Olive oil and fish sauce containers were attested in comparable quantities, but a number of amphorae of unknown content is very high in this region, so establishing a content for a part of amphora types currently classified as unknown is likely to change patterns.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe consumption pattern for Italy with Rome, Ostia and the Bay of Naples excluded shows again a similar development - wine amphorae were the first and most commonly imported (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e). They considerably exceeded numbers of other jars during the Republican age and peak in the early 1st c. CE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003eb). However, the more limited variability between amphorae carrying different contents at Italian sites shows a clear difference with the consumption pattern in Rome (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003ea-b), where the quantitative dominance of wine amphorae is much more extreme.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWine was clearly the most widely consumed amphora-borne foodstuff regardless of the area of Italy. The high frequency of wine amphorae in Campania during the late Republican age on the one hand points to its role as a wine producer, while on the other highlights consumption capacities of towns and \u003cem\u003evillae otia\u003c/em\u003e in the region (Adams, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e: 274\u0026ndash;293; Varriale, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR94\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Marzano\u0026amp;M\u0026eacute;traux, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Olive oil and fish amphorae on the other hand demonstrate no considerable differences between the consumption trends in the capital and on other sites.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4a. Tyrrhenian vs. Adriatic consumption and economic development\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Tyrrhenian part of Italy started to consume foodstuffs imported in amphorae around 400 BCE, but until 200 BCE their numbers were low and imports were limited to wine (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e). Olive oil and fish sauces became more frequent during the 1st and 2nd c. CE and, as elsewhere, after 200 CE a drop in their numbers may be observed. Site dates (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003eb) demonstrate that imports were consumed in Italy in higher quantities during the 1st and 2nd c. CE. Note the particularly high levels of wine transport containers dated to the Flavian period for Tyrrhenian sites as compared to Adriatic sites (compare Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003eb and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig15\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003eb). This is caused by contexts dated to the Flavian period predominating in the Tyrrhenian part of Italy, especially in Rome. Site count shows (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003ec, d) that wine, olive oil, fish sauces and other goods were equally widely distributed in the western part of Italy. However, wine, as elsewhere, was imported in highest volumes (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003ea, b) and diversity (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003ee,f; although the typical contents of many types is unknown), though diversity in imported wine types may only be observed during the period of the consumption boom.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConsumption patterns in Adriatic Italy differ in interesting ways, because the frequency of wine and olive oil containers is almost equal but much lower in amplitude compared to the Tyrrhenian sites (compare Figs.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003eb and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig15\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003eb), while fish sauce and other products are attested in very small numbers. Another interesting difference is the much lower diversity of wine amphora types at Adriatic sites as compared to Tyrrhenian sites (compare Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003ef with 15 f). Site count (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig15\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003ec, d) shows that numbers of sites which imported amphorae were only slightly lower during Late Antiquity than during the Principate, which suggests that even though the general volume of imports decreased starting from the 3rd c. CE (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig15\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003ea, b), imported products had a broader range than in the Tyrrhenian part. The highest diversity of goods was registered during the early Imperial period, and regarded mostly wine, and those of unknown content (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig15\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003ee, f). The high number of types with unknown prime use contents in late antiquity reveals the need for more research dedicated to identifying these contents.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNumbers of imported products, their scale and diversity did not differ much between the western and eastern parts of Italy, though it seems that the Crisis of the Third Century had a different impact on these two areas. In the Tyrrhenian part numbers, range and diversity of imports decreased significantly due to the effect of the peak of wine amphorae in the 1st -2nd centuries CE, while in the Adriatic this wine peak did not exist and so the drop in the third century is less pronounced.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e4b. Foodstuffs in cities vs. foodstuffs in villages\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigures \u003cspan refid=\"Fig16\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan refid=\"Fig17\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e and \u003cspan refid=\"Fig18\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e demonstrate that there were no considerable differences in the consumption patterns between urban, rural and harbour sites in Italy - all imported the highest quantities of wine, especially, between 1 and 200 CE, but wine was also much more popular during the late Republic. Olive oil held the second position in urban sites and harbours, while fish sauce amphorae were more common in rural sites (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig16\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003ea, b, \u003cspan refid=\"Fig17\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e a, b, \u003cspan refid=\"Fig18\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e, a, b). All amphora types, regardless of the foodstuff they carried, had an equally wide distribution, but wine containers had a wider distribution in the late republican period in urban contexts (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig16\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003ec, d; \u003cspan refid=\"Fig17\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e c, d; \u003cspan refid=\"Fig18\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e c, d). Wine amphora types were the most diverse in urban and harbour sites from the late Republican and early Imperial period, and they were also slightly more diverse on rural sites in this period (although the prime use content of a high number of types is unknown). Diversity of fish sauces and olive oil containers was comparable (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig16\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003ee,f; \u003cspan refid=\"Fig17\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e e,f; \u003cspan refid=\"Fig18\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e e,f).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese patterns show that no considerable differences can be observed in consumption trends of different foodstuffs on rural, urban and harbour sites. All consumed high volumes of wines, olive oil and fish sauces, but obviously on harbour and especially rural sites both their volume and diversity were smaller. This difference is caused by much lower numbers of rural sites with lower ceramic frequencies in the database (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Also, it seems that cities and harbours imported more olive oil than fish sauces, while villages needed more fish products than olive oil. Although the quantities and differences are small, this is an interesting minor pattern. The explanation of this phenomenon may be quite simple - most rural sites were situated inland, where local production of fish products is limited due to lack of sea fish and often salt. At the same time, olive trees can be easily cultivated and they grow even better in hilly inland territories than at the coast.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5. Italian supply in different foodstuffs\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe have already analysed production and consumption patterns from the perspective of the product provenance and destination. Now it is time to concentrate on each type of imported foodstuff separately in order to analyse in detail how the supply of Italy in wine, olive oil and fish products was organised and which were the main supplying regions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5a. Wine suppliers to Italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere were four main areas that supplied Italy with imported wine, namely: Africa, Gaul, Spain (provinces Baetica and Tarraconensis) and the Aegean region (mostly islands belonging to the province of Asia, as well as Crete). However, from the 4th and 3rd c. BCE until the Augustan age almost all wines consumed in Italy came from the Apennine Peninsula, from its Tyrrhenian and Adriatic part, with an overwhelming preponderance of the latter at the turn of the eras (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig19\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003ea). They were transported in Greco-Italic amphorae, produced mostly in southern Italy and Sicily, but also elsewhere in the Apennine Peninsula (Lyding Will, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1982\u003c/span\u003e; Vandermersch, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR91\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e) as well as probably in Lamboglia 2 containers starting from the 2nd c. BCE (Formenti, Hesnard\u0026amp;Tchernia 1978). Aegean wines were the earliest provincial imports and they reached Italy already in the 2nd c. BCE. There are, however, single finds of Rhodian stamps, which suggest an even earlier appearance of Greek wines in Italy, that means the late 3rd c. BCE. Nevertheless, even based on stamps, one may conclude that larger-scale and more diversified imports started during the 2nd c. BCE (Taylor, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR87\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1957\u003c/span\u003e: 134; Lusuardi Siena, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1977\u003c/span\u003e: 233\u0026ndash;234; Bevilacqua, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1994\u003c/span\u003e, 463; Tchernia, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR88\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1986\u003c/span\u003e: 103; Pascual Berlanga, Ribera i Lacomba\u0026amp;Finkielsztejn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e: 509\u0026ndash;513), which corresponds with the results of this study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAegean wines were followed by Tarraconesian in the 1st c. BCE, but wine from Spain was never imported in particularly high volume. During the Augustan age, Gallic imports appeared in Italy and they reached a peak in the late 1st c. CE, exceeding Tyrrhenian and Adriatic wines (at least using amphora production dates). Imports of African and Baetican wines started during the Augustan age and lasted until c. 400 and 200 CE respectively. All wine imports were the most numerous between 1 and 200 CE, and fell down to very modest levels after this date. Site dates point to particularly high levels of Tyrrhenian and Aegean amphorae during the late 1st c. CE, but this was probably due to predominance of contexts dated to the Flavian period in the database upon which this study was based (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig19\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003eb). All types of imports were distributed all over Italy, but Italian, Aegean and to a lesser degree Gallic wines were discovered on the highest number of sites, other imports being considerably less common (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig19\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003ec, d). Aegean and Gallic imports had also the highest diversity (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig19\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003ee, f).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe obvious conclusion is that Italy was rather self-sufficient in terms of wine supply until the Augustan age, as both its Tyrrhenian and Adriatic parts produced enough to satisfy most of the consumption demand. The only provincial imports that counted during the late Republic were Aegan vintages, often highly praised in literary sources from this period, which indicates that they were top quality products during the Republic. Large quantities of Gallic, Spanish and African wines were necessary in Italy during the first two hundred years of the Principate, but it seems that also during this period the Aegean region was the most important provincial wine supplier considering the volume of imports, their distribution and varieties. These varieties, however, were no longer among eastern luxury products (Komar 2020: 76\u0026ndash;127). Gaul held the second post in imperial wine supply, but Gallic wines were clearly less numerous and less widely distributed. Moreover, after 200 CE only provincial imports from the Eastern Mediterranean and Africa were seen on the Italian market, but it should be emphasised that they arrived in much smaller quantities. Surprisingly, Oriental wines have a wider distribution in Italy during Late Antiquity and their diversity is higher than before the 3rd c. AD. Also, they appear to have been more popular than the Aegean and African wines during this period.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt is clear that wine trade had the biggest share in Italian supply and that wine was not only the earliest, but also the most important import (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003ea, b). Therefore, we should not overestimate the role of the trade in Baetican olive oil, which, although seems massive from the perspective of Monte Testaccio, was actually less economically important than wine.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5b. Olive oil suppliers to Italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdriatic Italy was the most important olive oil supplier during the Republican and early Imperial period, but since the 1st c. CE, high numbers of Baetican and African olive oil containers appeared on the Apennine Peninsula (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig20\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003ea, b). Olive oil amphorae from the Aegean region and the Tyrrhenian part of Italy were minor in volume, distribution and diversity. Adriatic olive oil containers were the most widely distributed during the Republican age, while Baetica overtook this position during the early Imperial age and Africa started to dominate during the late Empire (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig20\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003ec, d). Considering diversity, African containers held a first place throughout the whole Antiquity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese results clearly demonstrate that the Italian olive oil suppliers were considerably less numerous than the suppliers of wine. Only two provinces, Baetica and Africa provided the Apennine Peninsula with significant quantities of olive oil, the former being more widely distributed, but the latter probably providing the highest variety of oil types. These imports must have been particularly important for the Tyrrhenian part of Italy, which produced considerable surpluses of wine, but almost none of olive oil. At the same time, cultivation of olives and oil production was vigorous in the Adriatic part and during the Republican age this region satisfied most of the need for imported olive oil on the Apennine Peninsula. Maybe this explains the scarcity of Dressel 20 amphorae observed in the Adriatic part of Italy\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e. As elsewhere, we see that most provincial imports were consumed during the first 200 years of the Empire and that their consumption was the most intense until 200 CE.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5c. Fish products suppliers to Italy\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFigure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig21\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e demonstrates that Baetica was the main Italian supplier of imported fish products. These imports started in the Augustan age, they were the most numerous between 1 and 200 CE and attested in a high number of contexts (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig21\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003ea, b, c, d). The second post was held by Lusitania - the range of amphorae from this area was particularly high during late Antiquity. Other areas that also produced salted fish and fish sauces, that means Gaul, Africa and Hispania Tarraconensis could not compete with Baetica, as both the volume and distribution range of imports from these areas were considerably smaller, c. 10% of Baetican results. Africa produced a significant number of fish amphorae, which were more numerous than Baetican during the late Imperial age. Tyrrhenian and Adriatic fish amphorae are in minority.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIt seems that Italy, both Tyrrhenian and Adriatic, produced very little salted fish and fish sauces and had to rely mostly on provincial imports. The products from Baetica were the most important, especially during the early Imperial age, which indicates that this region was the most indispensable among Italy\u0026rsquo;s suppliers, providing the highest volumes of both olive oil and fish sauces, at least until the 3rd c. AD. During Late Antiquity African products became much more significant, but in terms of fish sauce provisions, African imports gave way to Lusitanian in frequency and diversity. Other areas, such as Gaul and Hispania Tarraconensis provided Italy with some amounts of fish products, but they were neither numerous nor popular, as only attested occasionally in small quantities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis paper investigates many different aspects of amphora assemblages discovered in 66 sites across Italy, including 28.851 diagnostic fragments dated roughly between 400 BCE and 700 CE. This scale of amphora analysis for Italy has never been attempted before, but a similar study regarding transport containers discovered in Germania has been undertaken (Franconi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), so the results can easily be compared. Previous synthetic works were limited to one or a few sites at most (E. g. Terme del Nuotatore in Ostia, see Panella\u0026amp;Rizzo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; or several contexts in Rome, see Rizzo, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e or Rizzo\u0026amp;Moreno Meg\u0026iacute;as, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) and they adopted traditional approaches of quantitative visualisations, presenting numbers of fragments (all, RBH, NMI or EVE etc.) and occasionally their weight, and using only site dates. Therefore, analyses of long lasting trends in amphora commerce and consumption based on a large database and presented according to different visualisation methods were missing. The methods we have used here not only demonstrate new ways of quantifying and classifying ceramic assemblages at a broad, synthetic scale, but also are transparent and can be reproduced for assemblages from other areas of the Roman Empire or beyond in the future. Thanks to these methods we were able to identify known patterns and reveal completely novel chronological patterns of the trade and consumption of amphora-borne foodstuffs in Italy.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirst of all, it has been suggested by a number of archaeological sources (see above) that the Roman Empire experienced extensive and maybe also intensive growth during the end of the Republic and the beginning of the Principate and that this growth might have had a sustainable character, although there are still many doubts regarding this matter. This study provides further evidence suggesting that the growth existed, and that it can be observed all over Italy, regardless of geographic location and the function of the site. The variations observed between the Tyrrhenian and Adriatic parts as well as between urban and rural zones regarded only the scale of consumption increase and product diversity. Considering that the observed consumption boom existed not only in the capital, but also in inland rural parts of the Apennine Peninsula, it seems reasonable to conclude that it might have had a per capita character, that means brought a general improvement of life standards for all the inhabitants. During the late Republican and early Imperial period the ubiquity of goods, reflected in the number of sites they were attested at, and diversity of products, seen by both the highest number of amphora types and their almost pan-Mediterranean provenance, were the highest. Such patterning suggests a considerable market integration during this period, as also argued in other studies that analysed different categories of evidence, namely grain prices and eastern sigillata (Brughmans\u0026amp;Poblome, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Temin, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR92\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2001\u003c/span\u003e; \u003cspan citationid=\"CR93\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; contra see Tchernia, 2011:101\u0026ndash;131 and Bransbourg, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The fall in amphora curves after 200 CE seen not only by the frequency, but also by site and type count, was equally dramatic all over Italy and touched both urban, harbour and rural areas, which suggests sudden external shocks as a cause of the decline and, at the same time, the sustainable character of the growth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoreover, this study showed that Rome was not exceptional in terms of consumption trends and commercial supply networks, as results observed for Rome resembled the general pattern as well as the trends noted for different parts of Italy separately. What happened in Rome was probably soon, or immediately followed all over Italy, which suggests that the inhabitants of the capital might have set trends for most of the parts of the Apennine Peninsula, or that Roman supply was simply in line with general consumption trends. Therefore, if the consumption boom is to be interpreted as a sign of economic growth, it seems that Italy in general (not only Rome) experienced this growth that lasted from c. 200 BCE and had a peak in the 1st and 2nd c. CE and was followed by a 3rd c. decrease.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe general lack of differences in consumption patterns between cities and villages (except for the volume of imports), again suggests the same pace of development of these areas. Moreover, this implies that rural sites were not outcasts isolated from the general economic growth of the Empire. Since fish products were important elements of the Roman, even inhabitants of inland villages could import them, regardless how far from the seaside they lived. This points to a general similarity in the diet of the wealthy and the diet of the poor (demonstrated also on a smaller scale by other studies) and may also indirectly suggest the existence of the \u003cem\u003eper capita\u003c/em\u003e growth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll parts of Italy imported considerable amounts of each type of amphora-borne foodstuff, which again indicates that the development and consumption, and the supposed economic growth had a similar pace all over the Apennine Peninsula, and cannot only be associated with conspicuous consumption of the Roman elites. Therefore, it is possible to suspect that the growth had other causes than only a conquest of new territories and predatory actions, as suggested by Scheidel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR86\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e). Even if the conquest and exploitation of the provinces brought the first spur of economic development, then this must have been supported by other factors, such as the general productivity, which allowed small farmers in the centre of the Apennine Peninsula to enjoy imported foodstuffs (especially wine) as a daily and natural choice, not a luxury.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study sheds new light not only on the economic development, consumer preferences and trading networks on the Apennine Peninsula, but also in the provinces. Italy was supplied with amphora-borne foodstuffs predominantly from the coastal provinces, such as Africa, Hispania Baetica, Tarraconensis, Gaul, Sicily, Achaia, Asia, Cilicia and Palestine. However, the supply was not equal throughout, as different areas blossomed and withered in different conditions and chronological periods and they also specialised in different types of supply. Regarding provincial imports Aegean wines came first and remained the most common in Italy during the Republican and early Imperial age. Gaul and Hispania Tarraconensis were other, but less important imperial wine suppliers. All these imports, however, disappeared after the Crisis of the Third century leaving the market for African and Oriental wines. Baetica was the main Italian olive oil and fish sauce supplier, but its position was important only during the first 200 years of the principate. During this period fish sauces came to Italy also from Lusitania, Gaul and Hispania Tarraconensis, but in much smaller volumes and diversity. However, during Late Antiquity both live oil and fish sauces were imported mostly from Africa, and in the case of the latter Lusitania, which became the main foodstuff supplier in this period. Wine was definitely an important element of the diet and high volumes needed to be imported constantly between 400 BCE and 600/700 CE, with the highest levels of wine consumption obviously attested for the early Empire. The large-scale imports of olive oil and fish sauces lasted considerably shorter than the imports of wine. All three categories of foodstuffs were equally traded to different parts of Italy regardless of geographic location and site function, the only exception being small differences in olive oil and fish products between the cities (higher needs for olive oil) and villages (higher needs for fish sauces). Summing up, the trade patterns presented in this study revealed elements of consumption preferences in Italy and production strategies in widely different parts of the Mediterranean, stretching from the Iberian Peninsula and through North Africa to the Levant.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, this analysis provided evidence regarding the agricultural productivity and specialisation in different regions of Italy. This study has shown that the Tyrrhenian part of Italy started to produce surpluses earlier, already during the middle Republican period, but during the 2nd c. BCE, the Adriatic part joined the Italian amphora production and export. Nevertheless, since the Tyrrhenian part specialised predominantly in wines (famous Campanian vintages), the Adriatic was equally active in both production of wine and olive oil. There is little amphora evidence regarding the large-scale production of fish sauces for export on the Apennine Peninsula. The Central Tyrrhenian coast and north-Adriatic Italy (the Po Valley in particular) were main (if not the only) pan-Italian producers of export surpluses during the Republican and early Imperial period, but in the 2nd and 3rd c. the Tiber Valley blossomed as wine supplier to the capital. During Late Antiquity south Italy (and Sicily) became the only supplier in amphora-borne foodstuffs, probably mostly wine, from the Apennine Peninsula.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSumming up, this study confirmed and revealed not only commercial and consumption trends in Italian supply, but also their dynamism in both time and scale, as well as their duration. This comprehensive view allows us to understand the tastes and preferences among Italian consumers as well as long-distance trade connections between Italy and other regions of the Roman Empire. It is worth emphasising, that the patterns of Mediterranean integration and disintegration have not so far been quantitatively empirically explored on Empire-wide levels, but only limited to narrow case studies\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e. This study is, thus, the first one to offer such a broad perspective and is the first based on such a large database for Central Italy. Actually, each pattern or trend revealed by this study could be an object of a detailed analysis, which considers other categories of evidence that are beyond the scope of this paper. Overall, this paper not only provides methodological guidance for future synthetic approaches to pottery analyses, but can also be seen as an incentive for further studies of different economic trends observed based on amphora quantifications.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eCompeting Interests:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors declare none.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding statement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis research project was financed by a grant from the National Science Centre in Poland No. 2019/35/D/HS3/02142 (PK); Danmarks Frie Forskningsfond (DFF) Sapere Aude research leadership grant (0163-00060B) for the MINERVA Project (TB); Danish National Research Foundation (DNRF) Centre of Excellence for Urban Network Evolutions (UrbNet) (DNRF119) (TB).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePaulina Komar and Tom Brughmans wrote the main manuscript text and Ekaterina Borisova prepared figures 1-21. All authors reviewed the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe thank Laura Paulsen for data preparation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe dataset used is openly available as part of our Github repository: https://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdams, G. (2005). \u003cem\u003eThe nature of the villa suburbana in Latium and Campania\u003c/em\u003e\u003cem\u003e: literary and spatial analysis of social and potential entertainment functions from the 2nd c. BC to the 2nd c. AD, \u003c/em\u003eUnpublished PhD thesis, University of Adelaide. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArthur, P. (1995). Roman exports to the North. Wine in the West: a view from Campania. In Swaddling, J, Walker, S, Roberts, P. (Eds\u003cem\u003e.), Italy in Europe: economic relations 700 BC\u0026ndash;AD 50 \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 241\u0026ndash;251). British Museum.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArthur, P.\u0026amp;Williams, D. (1992). Campanian wine, Roman Britain and the third century A.D. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Roman Archaeology\u003c/em\u003e 5, 250\u0026ndash;260.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBang, P.F. (2008). \u003cem\u003eThe Roman bazaar: a comparative study of trade and markets in a tributary empire.\u003c/em\u003e Cambridge University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBevilacqua, G. (1994). Bolli anforari rodii da Falerii Novi. In AA.VV., \u003cem\u003eEpigrafia della\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003eproduzione e della distribuzione. Actes de la VIe Rencontre franco-italienne sur\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003el\u0026rsquo;\u0026eacute;pigraphie du monde romain, Rome, 5\u0026ndash;6 juin 1992 \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 463\u0026ndash;475). Roma;.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBoetto, G.\u0026amp;Bukowiecki, E. (2010). Portus. Les entrepots de Trajan. \u003cem\u003eM\u0026eacute;langes de l\u0026rsquo;\u0026Eacute;cole fran\u0026ccedil;aise de Rome \u0026ndash; Antiquit\u0026eacute; \u003c/em\u003e122 (1), 303\u0026ndash;10. https://doi.org/10.4000/mefra.469\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBowman, A.K.\u0026amp;Wilson, A. (Eds.) (2009). \u003cem\u003eQuantifying the Roman economy: methods and problems. \u003c/em\u003eOxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.001.0001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBransbourg, G. (2012). Rome and the economic integration of empire. \u003cem\u003eISAW Working Papers\u003c/em\u003e 3, http://dlib.nyu.edu/awdl/isaw/isaw-papers/3.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrughmans, T.\u0026amp;Poblome, J. (2016). Roman bazaar or market economy? Explaining tableware distributions through computational modelling. \u003cem\u003eAntiquity \u003c/em\u003e90, 393-408. https://doi.org/10.15184/aqy.2016.35\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrughmans, T.\u0026amp;Pecci, A. (2020). An inconvenient truth. Evaluating the impact of amphora reuse through computational simulation modelling. In Bowman A, Wilson A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eRecycling and reuse in the Roman economy \u003c/em\u003e(pp.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e191\u0026ndash;237)\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003eOxford: Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198860846.003.0006\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCrema, E.R. (2012). Modelling Temporal Uncertainty in Archaeological Analysis. \u003cem\u003eJ Archaeol Method Theory\u003c/em\u003e. 19(3), 440\u0026ndash;61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-011-9122-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDe Callata\u0026yuml;, F. (2005). The Graeco-Roman economy in the super-long run: lead, copper, and shipwrecks. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Roman Archaeology\u003c/em\u003e 18, 361\u0026ndash;72. doi:10.1017/S104775940000742X\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDe Callata\u0026yuml;, F. (2014). \u003cem\u003eQuantifying the Greco-Roman economy and beyond.\u003c/em\u003e Edipuglia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDe Ruyt, C. (2000). Exigences fonctionelles et vari\u0026eacute;t\u0026eacute; des interpr\u0026eacute;tations dans l\u0026rsquo;architecture des macella du monde romain. In Lo Cascio E. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eMercati permanenti e mercati periodici nel mondo romano \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 177\u0026ndash;86). Edipuglia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDurliat, J. (1990). \u003cem\u003eDe la ville antique \u0026agrave; la ville byzantine. Le probl\u0026egrave;me des subsistances.\u003c/em\u003e \u0026Eacute;cole fran\u0026ccedil;aise de Rome; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEhmig, U. (2003). \u003cem\u003eDie r\u0026ouml;mischen Amphoren aus Mainz.\u003c/em\u003e Frankfurter Arch\u0026auml;ologische Schriften 4, M\u0026ouml;hnesee.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFentress, E.\u0026amp;Perkins, P. (1988). Counting African red slip ware. \u003cem\u003eAfr Romana.\u003c/em\u003e 5, 205\u0026ndash;14\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFinley, M.I. (1999). \u003cem\u003eThe ancient economy.\u003c/em\u003e University of California Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFormenti, F., Hesnard, A.\u0026amp;Tchernia, A. (1978). Une amphore (Lamboglia 2) contenant du vin dans l\u0026apos;\u0026eacute;pave de la Madrague de Giens. \u003cem\u003eArchaeonautica \u003c/em\u003e2,\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e95-100.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFranco, C. (2014). \u003cem\u003eSicilian amphorae (1st\u0026ndash;6th centuries ad): typology, production and trade.\u003c/em\u003e PhD thesis defended at Oxford University. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFranconi, T., Brughmans, T., Borisova, E.\u0026amp;Paulsen, L. (2023). From Empire-wide integration to regional localization: A synthetic and quantitative study of heterogeneous amphora data in Roman Germania reveals centuries-long change in regional patterns of production and consumption. \u003cem\u003ePLOS One.\u003c/em\u003e https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279382.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFriesen, S.J.\u0026amp;Scheidel, W. (2009). The Size of the Economy and the Distribution of Income in the Roman Empire. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Roman Studies.\u003c/em\u003e 99, 61\u0026ndash;91. doi:10.3815/007543509789745223\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFunari, A.P. (1994). Baetica and the Dressel 20 production An outline of the province\u0026apos;s history. \u003cem\u003eDialogues d\u0026apos;histoire ancienne.\u003c/em\u003e 20(1), 87-105.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGiuliani, C.F. (2001). I porti di Claudio e Traiano. In Giacobelli M. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eLezioni Fabio Faccenna: conferenze di archeologia subacquea \u003c/em\u003e(pp.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e115-26). Edipuglia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGupta, S., Williams, D.\u0026amp;Peacock, D. (2001). Dressel 2\u0026ndash;4 Amphorae and Roman Trade with India: the evidence from Nevasa. \u003cem\u003eSouth Asian Studies.\u003c/em\u003e 17(1), 7-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02666030.2001.9628589\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHanson, J.W. (2016). \u003cem\u003eAn urban geography of the Roman world, 100 BC to AD 300.\u003c/em\u003e Archaeopress; https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv17db2z4\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHarper, K. (2017). \u003cem\u003eThe Fate of Rome\u003c/em\u003e. Princeton University Press; https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400888917\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHopkins, K. (1978). Economic Growth and Towns in Classical Antiquity. In Abrams, P.\u0026amp;Wrigley, E.A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eTowns in Societies: essays in economic history and historical sociology\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 35\u0026ndash;77). Cambridge University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHopkins, K. (1980). Taxes and Trade in the Roman Empire (200 BC\u0026ndash;AD 400). \u003cem\u003eJournal of Roman Studies. \u003c/em\u003e70, 101\u0026ndash;25.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHopkins, K. (2002). Rome, taxes, rents and trade. In Scheidel, W.\u0026amp;Von Reden S. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Ancient Economy\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 190\u0026ndash;230). Edinburgh University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M. (2006). The rise and fall of the Roman economy: population, rents and entitlement. In Bang, P., Ikeguchi, M.\u0026amp;Ziche, H. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eAncient economies and modern methodologies. Archaeology, comparative history, models and institutions\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 237\u0026ndash;54). Edipuglia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M. (2007a). Gibbon was right: the decline and fall of the Roman economy. In Hekster O, De Kleijn, G., Slootjes, D. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eCrises and the Roman empire\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 183\u0026ndash;99). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004160507.i-448.38\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M. (2007b). The early Roman Empire: consumption. In Scheidel W, Morris I, Saller R. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Cambridge economic history of the Greco-Roman world \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 592\u0026ndash;618). Cambridge University Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M. (2009). Archaeology, Demography, and Roman Economic Growth. In Bowman A, Wilson, A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eQuantifying the Roman Economy: Methods and Problems \u003c/em\u003e(pp.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e115\u0026ndash;26). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.003.0004\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M. (2014). The new economic history of the Roman empire. In De Callata\u0026yuml; F. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eQuantifying the Greco-Roman economy and beyond\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 169\u0026ndash;88). Edipuglia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M. (2017a). Afterword to: Keith Hopkins, Taxes and trade in the Roman Empire (200 BC\u0026ndash;AD 400). In Kelly C. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eSociological Studies in Roman History / Keith Hopkins\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 260\u0026ndash;68). Cambridge University Press. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M. (2017b). The benefits of market integration: five centuries of prosperity in Roman Italy. In De Haas TCA, Tol GW. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe economic integration of Roman Italy: rural comminities in a globalizing world\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 15\u0026ndash;27). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004345027_003\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJongman, W.M., Jacobs, J.\u0026amp;Klein-Goldewijk, G. (2019). Health and wealth in the Roman empire, economics and human biology. \u003cem\u003eEconomics and Human Biology Journal.\u003c/em\u003e 34, 138\u0026ndash;50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2019.01.005\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJohnson, I. (2004). Aoristic Analysis: seeds of a new approach to mapping archaeological distributions through time. In Ausserer, K.F., B\u0026ouml;rner, W., Goriany, M., Karlhuber-V\u0026ouml;ckl, L. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eEnter the Past The E-way into the Four Dimensions of Cultural Heritage\u003c/em\u003e: CAA 2003 (pp. 448\u0026ndash;52). Archaeopress (BAR International Series). http://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-2085\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeay, S.J. (1984). \u003cem\u003eLate Roman amphorae in the Western Mediterranean. A typology and economic study: the Catalan evidence.\u003c/em\u003e Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKeay, S.J. (1988). \u003cem\u003eRoman Spain. Exploring the Roman World\u003c/em\u003e. University of California Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKoepke, N. (2016). The Biological Standard of Living in Europe from the Late Iron Age to the Little Ice Age. In Komlos, J.\u0026amp;Kelly, I.R. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Oxford Handbook of Economics and Human Biology\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 70\u0026ndash;108). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199389292.013.34\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKoma,r P. (2020)\u003cem\u003e. Eastern Wines on Western Tables: Consumption, Trade and Economy in Ancient Italy,\u003c/em\u003e Leiden/Boston: Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004433762\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKomar, P. (2021). Wine imports and economic growth in Rome between the late Republic and early Empire. \u003cem\u003eHistoria - Zeitschrift fur Alte Geschichte\u003c/em\u003e 70(4), 437-462. https://doi.org/10.25162/historia-2021-0016\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKron, G. (2005). Anthropometry, physical anthropology and the reconstruction of ancient health, nutrition, and living standards. \u003cem\u003eHistoria - Zeitschrift fur Alte Geschichte \u003c/em\u003e54, 68\u0026ndash;83.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKron, G. (2014). Comparative evidence and the reconstruction of the ancient economy: Greco-Roman housing and the level and distribution of wealth and income. In De Callata\u0026yuml; F. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eQuantifying the Greco-Roman economy and beyond\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 123\u0026ndash;46). Edipuglia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLawall, M.L. (2006). Consuming the West in the East: Amphoras of the western Mediterranean in the Aegean before 86 BC. In Maltifana D, Poblome J, Lund J. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eOld pottery in a new century. Innovating perspectives on Roman pottery studies \u003c/em\u003e(pp.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e265-286). \u0026quot;L\u0026apos;Erma\u0026quot; di Bretschneider.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLo Cascio, E. (2009). Urbanization as a Proxy of Demographic and Economic Growth. In Bowman, A., Wilson, A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eQuantifying the Roman Economy: Methods and Problems \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 87\u0026ndash;106). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.003.0002\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLusuardi Siena, S. (1977). Anfore. In Frova, A. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eScavi di Luni II\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 218\u0026ndash;270). G. Bretschneider.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLyding Will, E. (1982). Greco-Italic Amphoras. \u003cem\u003eHesperia\u003c/em\u003e 51(3), 338\u0026ndash;356.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarli\u0026egrave;re, \u0026Eacute;. (2002). \u003cem\u003eL\u0026rsquo;outre et le tonneau dans l\u0026rsquo;occident romain. \u003c/em\u003eMergoil.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarli\u0026egrave;re, \u0026Eacute;.\u0026amp;Torres Costa J. (2005). Tonneaux et amphores \u0026agrave; Vindolanda, II: contribution \u0026agrave; la connaissance de l\u0026rsquo;approvisionnement des troupes stationn\u0026eacute;es sur la fronti\u0026egrave;re nord de l\u0026rsquo;Empire. In A. Birley and J. Blake (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eVindolanda Excavations 2003/2004\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 214\u0026ndash;36). Vindolanda Trust.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarli\u0026egrave;re, \u0026Eacute;.\u0026amp;Torres Costa, J. (2007). Transport et stockage des denr\u0026eacute;es dans l\u0026rsquo;Afrique romaine: le r\u0026ocirc;le de l\u0026rsquo;outre et du tonneau. In Mrabet A, Remesal Rodr\u0026iacute;guez J. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eIn Africa et in Hispania: \u0026eacute;tudes sur l\u0026rsquo;huile africaine\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 85\u0026ndash;106). Universitat de Barcelona.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarzano, A. (2013a). Agricultural Production in the Hinterland of Rome: Wine and Olive Oil. In Bowman, A.\u0026amp;Wilson, A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Roman Agricultural Economy: Organisation, Investment, and Production \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 85\u0026ndash;106). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665723.003.0004\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarzano, A. (2013b). Capital Investment and Agriculture: Multi-Press Facilities from Gaul, the Iberian Peninsula and the Black Sea Region. In Bowman A, Wilson A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe Roman Agricultural Economy: Organisation, Investment, and Production \u003c/em\u003e(pp\u003cem\u003e. \u003c/em\u003e107\u0026ndash;41). Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199665723.003.0005\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarzano, A. (2015). Villas as instigators and indicators of economic growth. In Erdkamp, P.\u0026amp;Verboven, K. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eStructure and performance in the Roman economy: models, methods and case studies\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 197\u0026ndash;221). Editions Latomus. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarzano, A., M\u0026eacute;traux, G.P.R., (Eds.) (2018)., \u003cem\u003eThe Roman Villa in the Mediterranean Basin: Late Republic to Late Antiquity. \u003c/em\u003eCambridge University Press; https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316687147\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMcConnell, J.R., Wilson, A.I., Stohl, A., Arienzo, M.M., Chellman, N.J., Eckhardt, S., Thompson, E.M., Pollard, A.M.\u0026amp;Steffensen, J.P. (2018). Lead pollution recorded in Greenland ice indicates European emissions tracked plagues, wars, and imperial expansion during antiquity. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Latest Articles.\u003c/em\u003e http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/05/08/1721818115/tab-figures-data, accessed 07.04.2021. 10.1073/pnas.1721818115\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMeiggs, R. (1973). Roman Ostia (2nd edition). Oxford: Clarendon Press.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Connell, T.C., Ballantyne, R.M., Hamilton-Dyer, S., Margaritis, E., Oxford, S., Pantano, W., Millett, M., Keay, S.J. (2019). Living and dying at the Portus Romae. \u003cem\u003eAntiquity.\u003c/em\u003e 93(369), 719\u0026ndash;34. doi:10.15184/aqy.2019.64\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eO\u0026rsquo;Donnell, J. (2009). \u003cem\u003eThe ruin of the Roman Empire.\u003c/em\u003e Profile Books. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePacetti, F. (2004). Celio. Basilica Hilariana: scavi 1987-1988. In Paroli, L.\u0026amp;Venditelli L. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eRoma dall\u0026rsquo;antichit\u0026agrave; al medioevo, 2. Contesti tardoantichi e altomedievali\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 435-457). Electa.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePanella, C. (1993). Merci e scambi nel Mediterraneo tardoantico. In Carandini, A., Cracco Ruggini, L., Giardina, A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eStoria di Roma III 2. L\u0026rsquo;et\u0026agrave; tardoantica. I luoghi e le culture\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 613\u0026ndash;697). Einaudi.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePanella, C. (2001). Le anfore di et\u0026agrave; imp\u0026eacute;riale del Mediterraneo occidentale. In L\u0026eacute;v\u0026ecirc;que, P., Morel, J.P.M.\u0026amp;Geny, E. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eC\u0026eacute;ramiques hell\u0026eacute;nistiques et romaines\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 177-276). Presses universitaires franc-comtoises; Paris: Diff. les Belles lettres; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePanella, C.\u0026amp;Rizzo, G. (2014). Ostia VI. \u003cem\u003eLe terme del Nuotatore (Studi miscellanei 38).\u003c/em\u003e L\u0026rsquo;Erma di Bretschneider; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eParker, A.J. (1992). \u003cem\u003eAncient Shipwrecks of the Mediterranean and the Roman Provinces.\u003c/em\u003e Tempus Reparatum; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePascual Berlanga, G., Ribera i Lacomba, A., Finkielsztejn, G. (2008). Las \u0026aacute;nforas griegas y\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ep\u0026uacute;nicas de recientes excavaciones en la regio VII de Pompeya. In Ballester, J.P., Pascual, G.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e(Eds.), \u003cem\u003eComercio, redistribuci\u0026oacute;n y fondeaderos. La navegaci\u0026oacute;n a vela en el Mediterr\u0026aacute;neo. V Jornadas de Arqueolog\u0026iacute;a Subacu\u0026aacute;tica\u003c/em\u003e, Gand\u0026iacute;a 2006 (pp. 501\u0026ndash;517). Universitat Internacional de Gandia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePavolini, C. (1996). Mercato ostiense e mercato romano: alcuni contesti ceramici a confronto. In Gallina Zevi, A.\u0026amp;Claridge, A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eRoman Ostia revisited\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 223\u0026ndash;242). British School at Rome; Soprintendenza Archeologica di Ostia..\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRemesal Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, J. (2008). Provincial interdependence in the Roman Empire: an explanatory model of Roman economy. In Funari P.P.A., Garraffoni R.S.\u0026amp;Letalien B. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eNew perspectives on the ancient world modern perceptions, ancient representations\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 155-159). Archaeopress. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRemesal Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, J. (2015-2016). El monte Testaccio (30 a\u0026ntilde;os de investigaci\u0026oacute;n). \u003cem\u003eTribuna d\u0026apos;Arqueologia. \u003c/em\u003e2018, 72-87. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRemesal Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, J. (2019). Monte Testaccio. Un archivo \u0026uacute;nico. In Remesal Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, J., Revilla, V., Mart\u0026iacute;n -Arroyo, D.J., Mart\u0026iacute;n, A. (Eds.) \u003cem\u003ePaisajes productivos y redes comerciales en el Imperio Romano\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 11-28). Universitat de Barcelona. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReynolds, P. (2010). \u003cem\u003eHispania and the Roman Mediterranean, AD 100-700: ceramics and trade. \u003c/em\u003eDuckworth; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRice, C.M. (2011). Ceramic assemblages and ports. In Robinson D, Wilson A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eMaritime archaeology and ancient trade in the Mediterranean \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 81\u0026ndash;92). Oxford Centre for Maritime\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003eArchaeology.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRizzo, G. (2003). \u003cem\u003eInstrumenta urbis I: ceramiche fini da mensa, lucerne ed anfore a Roma nei primi due secoli dell\u0026rsquo;impero.\u003c/em\u003e \u0026Eacute;cole fran\u0026ccedil;aise de Rome; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRizzo, G.\u0026amp;Moreno Meg\u0026iacute;as, V. (2019). Roma e le prime importazioni di alimenti ispanici trasportati in anfora. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Roman Archaeology\u003c/em\u003e 32, 23\u0026ndash;38. doi:10.1017/S1047759419000047\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRoberts, N., Neil, C., Woodbridge, J., Palmisano, A., Bevan, A., Fyfe, R.\u0026amp;Shennan, S. (2019). Mediterranean Landscape Change during the Holocene: Synthesis, Comparison and Regional Trends in Population, Land Cover and Climate. \u003cem\u003eThe Holocene\u003c/em\u003e. 29(5), 923-37. 10.1177/0959683619826697.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRowan, E. (2015). Sewers, Archaeobotany, and Diet at Pompeii and Herculaneum. In Flohr, M.\u0026amp; Wilson, A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eEconomy of Pompeii\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 111\u0026ndash;33). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198786573.003.0005\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRussell, J.C. (1958). \u003cem\u003eLate ancient and medieval population. \u003c/em\u003eAmerican Philosophical Society; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaller, R. (2005). Framing the debate over growth in the ancient economy. In Manning, J.J.G.\u0026amp;Morris, I. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eThe ancient economy: evidence and models \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 223\u0026ndash;238). Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474472326-018\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSantangeli Valenzani, R.\u0026amp;Volpe, R. (2012). Paesaggi agrari della viticoltura a Roma e nel\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSuburbium. In Ciacci, A., Rendini, P., Zifferero, A. (Eds\u003cem\u003e.), Archeologia della vite e del vino in Toscana e nel Latium. Dalle tecniche dell\u0026rsquo;indagine archeologica alle prospettive della biologia molecolare \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 61\u0026ndash;69). All Insegna del Giglio.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eScheidel, W. (2009). In search of Roman economic growth\u003cem\u003e. Journal of Roman Archaeology\u003c/em\u003e 22, 46\u0026ndash;70. doi:10.1017/S1047759400020584\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTaylor, D.M. (1957). Cosa: black glaze pottery. \u003cem\u003eMAAR.\u003c/em\u003e XV, 65\u0026ndash;193.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTchernia, A. (1986). \u003cem\u003eLe vin de l\u0026rsquo;Italie romaine. Essai d\u0026rsquo;histoire \u0026eacute;conomique d\u0026rsquo;apr\u0026egrave;s les\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003eamphores.\u003c/em\u003e \u0026Eacute;cole fran\u0026ccedil;aise de Rome; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTchernia, A. (2016). \u003cem\u003eThe Romans and trade.\u003c/em\u003e Oxford: Oxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198723714.001.0001,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVandermersch, C. (1994). \u003cem\u003eVins et amphores de Grande Gr\u0026egrave;ce et de Sicile IVe\u0026ndash;III s. avant J.-C. \u003c/em\u003eCentre Jean B\u0026eacute;rard; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTemin, P. (2001). A market economy in the early Roman empire. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Roman Studies\u003c/em\u003e 91, 169-181. doi:10.2307/3184775\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTemin, P. (2013). \u003cem\u003eThe Roman Market Economy.\u003c/em\u003e Princeton University Press; \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVarriale, I. (2016). Otium and Negotium: The Breakdown of a Boundary in the Imperial Villas. The case study of Pausilypon. In Weissenrieder, A. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eBorders: terms, ideologies, performances \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 283-301). Mohr Siebeck.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVolpe, R. (2009). Vino, vigneti et anfore in Roma repubblicana. In Jolivet V, Pavolini C,\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTemei, M.A.\u0026amp;Volpe, R. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eSUBURBIUM II: Il suburbio di Roma dalla fine dell\u0026rsquo;Et\u0026agrave;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u003cem\u003emonarchica alla nascita del sistema delle ville (V\u0026ndash;II secolo a.C.)\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 369\u0026ndash;381). Ecole Fran\u0026ccedil;aise de Rome.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilliams, D.F. (2004). The eruption of Vesuvius and its implications for the early Roman amphora trade with India. In Eiring, J.\u0026amp; Lund, J. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eTransport amphorae and trade in the Eastern Mediterranean \u003c/em\u003e(pp.\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003e441\u0026ndash;450). Danish Institute at Athens.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilson, A.I. (2009a). Approaches to Quantifying Roman Trade. In Bowman A, Wilson A. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eQuantifying the Roman Economy: Methods and Problems \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 213\u0026ndash;49). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199562596.003.0009\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilson, A.I. (2009b). Indicators for Roman economic growth: a response to Walter Scheidel. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Roman Archaeology \u003c/em\u003e22, 71\u0026ndash;82. doi:10.1017/S1047759400020596\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilson, A.I. (2014). Quantifying Roman Economic Performance by Means of Proxies: Pitfalls and Potential. In Callata\u0026yuml;, F. (Ed.), \u003cem\u003eQuantifying Greco-Roman Economy and beyond\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 133\u0026ndash;52). Edipuglia.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilson, A.\u0026amp;Bowman, A.K. (Eds.) (2018). \u003cem\u003eTrade, commerce, and the state in the Roman world. \u003c/em\u003eOxford University Press; https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198790662.001.0001\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXoplaki, E., Luterbacher, J., Luther, N., Behr, L., Wagner, S., Jungclaus, J., Zorita, E., Toreti, A., Fleitmann, D., Izdebski, A.\u0026amp;Bloomfield, K. (2021). Hydrological Changes in Late Antiquity: Spatio-Temporal Characteristics and Socio-Economic Impacts in the Eastern Mediterranean. In Erdkamp, P., Manning, J.G.\u0026amp;Verboven, K. (Eds.), \u003cem\u003eClimate change and ancient societies in Europe and the Near East: diversity in collapse and resilience\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 533-560). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-81103-7_18.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Footnotes","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e The dataset used is openly available as part of our Github repository: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://github.com/Tom-Brughmans/Sonata\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e Ex Baetica amphorae II, conference proceedings in preparation.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e There were, however, case studies regarding Spain, see Reynolds \u003cspan citationid=\"CR76\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e, and Mediterranean harbours, see Rice \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"journal-of-archaeological-method-and-theory","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"jarm","sideBox":"Learn more about [Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory](http://link.springer.com/journal/10816)","snPcode":"10816","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10816/3","title":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"amphoras, Rome, Italy, consumption patterns, economy","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4748698/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4748698/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThis paper presents novel insights into the long-term chronological patterns related to the distribution and consumption of amphora-borne foodstuffs in Italy. The study specifically focuses on the consumption of wine, olive oil, and fish sauces, both produced locally and imported from the provinces. Notably, it contributes significantly to our understanding of the Roman economy by revealing significant changes in the patterns of consumption and distribution of these foodstuffs over time on a scale that was previously unknown.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne of the key findings of our analysis is the demonstration that the consumption patterns observed in different areas of Italy were similar, suggesting an equal pace of development in both urban and rural settlements across the Apennine peninsula. Importantly, quantitative evidence shows that the consumption pattern observed in the capital city of Rome is less exceptional than previously believed, challenging existing perceptions about the city's uniqueness. The study draws upon a substantial dataset comprising 28,851 diagnostic amphora fragments excavated and documented from 28 different urban and rural settlements in the North Adriatic and central Italy, spanning the period from the 4th c. BCE to the 7th c. CE. The analytical approach employs a probabilistic aoristic method, evenly distributing amphora frequencies across relevant date ranges.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Consumption trends, trading patterns and economic development in Italy across centuries - data analysis of Roman amphorae in a long-term perspective","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-08-12 09:32:30","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4748698/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-10-28T09:38:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-10-26T15:54:19+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-09-19T17:31:05+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-09-13T14:25:28+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"212289776027260260455530004057425888339","date":"2024-08-05T19:28:52+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"288671076866526547044893363128659963289","date":"2024-07-31T21:15:26+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"268396959533203565496974665146220036486","date":"2024-07-30T09:23:52+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-07-20T09:19:39+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-07-18T09:46:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-07-17T23:28:05+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","date":"2024-07-16T09:42:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"journal-of-archaeological-method-and-theory","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"jarm","sideBox":"Learn more about [Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory](http://link.springer.com/journal/10816)","snPcode":"10816","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10816/3","title":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"a463e71f-aa68-4ec9-9e73-447278408927","owner":[],"postedDate":"August 12th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-01-13T16:06:12+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-4748698","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09686-1","journal":{"identity":"journal-of-archaeological-method-and-theory","isVorOnly":false,"title":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory"},"publishedOn":"2025-01-11 15:57:28","publishedOnDateReadable":"January 11th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-08-12 09:32:30","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s10816-024-09686-1","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09686-1","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4748698","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4748698","identity":"rs-4748698","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}