Buried Coins May Hold Key To Solving Mystery Of Ancient Roman Population "ScienceDaily (Oct. 6, 2009) — Using a mathematical model to predict population trends based on ancient coin hoards, a UConn biologist and a Stanford University historian have concluded that the population of ancient Rome was smaller than sometimes suggested." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091005161122.htm http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20091005/sc_livescience/ancientromesrealpopulationrevealed
I read that story too. I'm thinking of sharing it with my class since were going over human populations in class.
It is neat but I think the concept is flawed. First off, that is just taking into account what has been FOUND. It doesn't take into account hoards that have yet to be found or even hoards that were found and NOT documented. It also seems to assume that the only reason for burying coins was during times of war...but is that a known, given fact? I really don't know, but I would bet...no. In the times long before there were banks or safes, where would have been the safest place to hide your valuables? In the ground, where only YOU know they are burried. It also seems to assume that hoardes were only left if people were killed during the time of war. But that is a big assumption, who is to say that they didn't die of natural causes, or were even loot from a robbery and the criminal was caught before digging them up and using them? I seem to recall having read that only about 1 or 1 tenth of a percentage of ancient coins have survived to today. That report seems to be basing the numbers on the basis that the coins found in hoardes are ALL the coins that were minted in those times. In theory it is a interesting way to look at the past...but their logic and data is flawed, in my opinion.
Similar problems plague all statistical analyses of the ancient world. I would want to read their paper before I made any firm statements on it, though. For a good discussion of the use of coin hoards and site finds: Newton, Douglas P. 2006 Found Coins as Indicators of Coins in Circulation: Testing Some Assumptions European Journal of Archaeology 9: 211-227. Roberston, Anne S. 1988 Roman-British Coin Hoards: Their Numismatic, Archaeological, and Historical Significance. In Coins and Archaeology, edited by John Casey and Richard Reece, pp. 13-35. Seaby, London.
I dont think its flawed, just not complete (well based on the article) I think there are to many variables to include in the article, but i think this combined with other data can give us a better picture.
I would go by Octavian's survey as a good baseline. Penalties for lying to the emperor, where shall we say, Harsh. Times were good in old Rome so you figure the population doubled every 100 years or so. Traci
I'd say, not when "Times were good " but when time were bad you see a large increase but i guess it all depends on how bad too.
