06-27-2009, 08:39 PM
One of the grand questions and one of the most difficult, too, even if we are talking only of orders of magnitude. A really illuminating article was published by the late Raymond Goldsmith who did a great job of explaining his methodology to the non-economist (like me), and made some impressive comparisons to later empires and (early) modern states.
However, some of his premises may be in need of revision.
- he went with a maximum of 55-60 million between 1 and 200 AD, but did not figure in any rise of numbers in this period which I find curious
- he went by the then dominant view of a largely technologically stagnant society, a view which is at odds with the recent reappraisal of the degree of mechaniziation in several sectors of the Roman economy such as mining, and particularly agriculture, in which a wide variety of water-lifting devices next to the grain watermill were found to be actually employed. Since the single most important factor by far is the income per head in the agricultural sector, a positive reevaluation of the productivity of this sector would also have a noticeable effect on the overall calculation.
Now, my question is, is there a more recent calculation of the Roman national product, or its productive capacities in general, which works on more updated premises?
Raymond Goldsmith (1984): An Estimate of the Size and Structure of the National Product of the Early Roman Empireā, Review of Income and Wealth, vol. 30, no. 3, September, pp. 263-288
However, some of his premises may be in need of revision.
- he went with a maximum of 55-60 million between 1 and 200 AD, but did not figure in any rise of numbers in this period which I find curious
- he went by the then dominant view of a largely technologically stagnant society, a view which is at odds with the recent reappraisal of the degree of mechaniziation in several sectors of the Roman economy such as mining, and particularly agriculture, in which a wide variety of water-lifting devices next to the grain watermill were found to be actually employed. Since the single most important factor by far is the income per head in the agricultural sector, a positive reevaluation of the productivity of this sector would also have a noticeable effect on the overall calculation.
Now, my question is, is there a more recent calculation of the Roman national product, or its productive capacities in general, which works on more updated premises?
Raymond Goldsmith (1984): An Estimate of the Size and Structure of the National Product of the Early Roman Empireā, Review of Income and Wealth, vol. 30, no. 3, September, pp. 263-288
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)