Over the past decades, the disciplinary boundaries between Roman history and archaeology have begun to fade, as archaeological proxy data started playing an important role in studying socioeconomic processes and phenomena. This is especially true for several key debates such as those on Roman economic performance, diet and nutrition, and migration and mobility. More recently, archaeological sciences, such as stable isotope studies, have increasingly started contributing to these debates too. This paper is aimed at reviewing the valuable contributions stable isotope studies can make to these debates from the economic historian’s perspective and focuses on the interpretative side of such studies: what sort of economic meaning is attributed to certain results? It will be ascertained that there sometimes seems to be a divergence between the interpretations made by isotope experts and what many economic historians would conclude. The main cause for this lies in differences in the underlying assumptions as to the working and performance of ancient economies. We will provide examples where the same isotope results can be interpreted completely differently by switching between sets of underlying assumptions. We will argue that greater interaction between economic historians and stable isotope experts is desirable so as to avoid the emergence of parallel debates and to facilitate the construction of stronger, well-integrated narratives.

在过去的几十年中，随着考古代理数据开始在研究社会经济过程和现象中发挥重要作用，罗马历史与考古学之间的学科界限开始逐渐消失。对于诸如罗马经济表现，饮食和营养以及移民和流动性等一些关键辩论尤其如此。最近，诸如稳定同位素研究之类的考古科学也越来越多地开始为这些辩论做出贡献。本文旨在从经济史学家的角度回顾稳定同位素研究可以为这些辩论做出的宝贵贡献，并着重于此类研究的解释性方面：某些结果会带来什么样的经济意义？可以确定的是，有时候同位素专家的解释与许多经济史学家的结论之间似乎存在分歧。造成这种情况的主要原因是有关古代经济运作和绩效的基本假设存在差异。我们将提供一些示例，其中通过在一组基础假设之间进行切换，可以完全不同地解释相同的同位素结果。我们将争辩说，希望经济史学家和稳定的同位素专家之间进行更大程度的互动，以免出现平行辩论，并有助于构建更强大，整合程度更高的叙述。造成这种情况的主要原因是有关古代经济运作和绩效的基本假设存在差异。我们将提供一些示例，其中通过在一组基础假设之间进行切换，可以完全不同地解释相同的同位素结果。我们将争辩说，希望经济史学家和稳定的同位素专家之间进行更大程度的互动，以免出现平行辩论，并有助于构建更强大，整合程度更高的叙述。造成这种情况的主要原因是有关古代经济运作和绩效的基本假设存在差异。我们将提供一些示例，其中通过在一组基础假设之间进行切换，可以完全不同地解释相同的同位素结果。我们将争辩说，希望经济史学家和稳定的同位素专家之间进行更大程度的互动，以免出现平行辩论，并有助于构建更强大，整合程度更高的叙述。