What explains the much wider distribution of Eastern Sigillata A (ESA) tableware over a period of centuries? Can this pattern emerge as a result of historical contingency (a lock-in effect caused by it being available before other products)? Is preference for this product necessary to explain it?
What explains the decline of ESA? Its competition with Italian Sigillata (ITS) and other eastern products?
What is the impact of the introduction of ITS on the distribution of eastern tablewares? Can direct competition alone explain the changes in distribution? Is preference for a new product a necessary factor?
Does the earlier integration into the Roman empire explain the higher proportions of ITS in Achaia-Cyrenaica? Or does the ITS distribution show a simple fall-off in presence with distance from central Italy (as the crow flies and over transport routes)?
A collaboration between Dr. Tom Brughmans, Dr. Iza Romanowska and Simon Carrignon (Barcelona Supercomputing Centre)
