Cambridge Ancient Hi.. - Index of

the distribution of goods and wealth 375
above). 50 It is a region that can sustain a population engaged in mixed
farming, but only in small numbers and at the margins of prosperity; and
yet in the late Roman period the limestone massif was both densely settled
(see Fig. 7,p.329 above) and very prosperous. There is no way of proving
how this exceptional state of affairs came about. But the known demand
for Antiochene (Late Roman 1) amphorae, the presence of late antique
olive-presses around the villages of the massif, and the possibility of planting
trees in the tiny but numerous pockets of soil, together strongly suggest
that increased demand opened up this region to the specialized cultivation
of the olive.
This does not, of course, mean that all, or even the greater part, of the
oil of the limestone massif was produced for an overseas market. Producers
in all exporting regions must also have been growing to satisfy local and
regional demand, as well as the needs of their own households. Long-distance
trade, regional trade and local trade are indeed likely to have been
closely interlinked and mutually sustaining. For instance, the growth of a
regional trade in oil could create the structures to enable an overseas trade
to develop; while conversely, if some oil went overseas, this might encourage
the growth of a regional market in order to satisfy the regional need normally
supplied by the exported product. Both overseas and regional trade
might, in their turn, stimulate local demand, by helping to create a more
prosperous and more numerous peasantry. The possible ramifications in the
flow of goods and wealth are endless, and can never be thoroughly sorted
out, if only because it is impossible to do so from the archaeological record.
However, the archaeological record does suggest that overseas trade was
one important element at work in the creation of regional wealth.
Just as we do not need to believe that every peasant in an exporting area
worked directly for the overseas market, so we do not need to imagine specialized
areas of production as massive zones of monoculture, in the
manner of the modern American wheat-belt. The limestone massif, for
instance, would never have been an area exclusively of olive trees, importing
all other necessities from elsewhere. Rather, it was probably an area
where there were many more olive trees than the local population needed,
and where there were many more people living, at a higher level of prosperity,
than the soil could possibly have maintained without extensive commerce
and specialization. But, in amongst the olive trees, the peasants
would certainly have kept up as mixed and extensive a range of cultivation
as the landscape could support, with vegetable plots, fruit trees, small areas
of arable, and as many animals as possible.
I have argued that overseas trade, on a scale large enough to enrich those
who were exporting their goods, is the easiest way to explain the coincidence
50 The discussion that follows is based on Tchalenko, Villages, and Tate (1992).
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008