a enn oyVnbe,Ade isn n rgWoffrterhlflsgetos eaegaeu oteCentre the +44(0)20-7852-3518. Tel: to applies. grateful [email protected]. disclaimer are usual We The suggestions. support. helpful financial Kevin their its Manning, for for John Woolf Tervio, Alan Performance Marko Greg Goodman, Economic Redding, and for Penelope Steve Wilson, Purcell, Esteves, Andrew Nicholas Venables, Rui Puga, Tony Diego help- Caselli, Reenen, Pischke, Van for Francesco Steve Warwick Piccione, Bowman, and Nottingham, Michele Alan Vienna, Peretz, Munich, Au- Assaf Sussex, thank O’Rourke, Holloway, Amsterdam, Mannheim, also Royal We Aalto, LSE, Rotterdam, in comments. Leeds, Fabra, participants ful Pompeu Lausanne, seminar Panthéon-Sorbonne, Graz, 1 and Gothenburg, Paris Trade, Oxford, Edinburgh, International Budapest, in Workshop Barcelona, (Beijing) tonoma UIBE and History, and ∗ ‡ † eateto cnmc,Uiest fOfr,MnrRa,Ofr,O13UQ. OX1 Oxford, Road, Manor Oxford, of University Economics, Email: of UK. Department London, 2AE, WC2A Street, Houghton LSE, Performance, Economic for Centre and Department Economics Trade on Conference History Economic (Toulouse) IAST Meetings, ASSA the at participants conference thanks We EWRS cnmcGorpy cnmcHsoy ahDpnec,Transportation. Dependence, Path History, Economic Geography, Economic KEYWORDS: on nRmneatw oain nFac hni rti.Terstigo rti’ ra net- urban Britain’s of resetting The often Britain. more in were than towns France in medieval locations recovered, town urbanization Roman-era in As found France. in not but urbaniza- Britain, ended in temporarily tion which Empire, on Roman Western effects the the of collapse examine the We of locations centuries? town for locations unfavourable in towns trap events historical Accepted locations. suboptimal in towns French many trapped history from that growth town conclude We for mattered 1200-1800. which waterways, navigable natural to access better it gave work Article

This arti 10.1111/ecoj.12424 doi: this article as differences to lead between the of thisversion cite and Version Record.Please copyediting, paginationbeen throughthe andproofreadingtypesetting, process,may which This article acceptedhas been for publication andundergone fullpeer review but hasnot ofie egahcfaue uha oslnsadrvr eemn onlctos rcan or locations, town determine rivers and coastlines as such features geographic fixed Do hr title: Short E LSIIAIN 1,N3 O18 N93, R11, CLASSIFICATION: JEL cle i eetn h ra ewr:117-2012 Network: Urban the Resetting s protected bys protected copyright. All rights reserved. eetn h ra ewr:117-2012 Network: Urban the Resetting odnSho fEconomics of School London nvriyo Oxford of University ednn Rauch Ferdinand uut5 2016 5, August u Michaels Guy Abstract ‡ † ∗ This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. hs oain ol ehm obt uvvn n emrigtws eutn nhg persis- high in resulting towns, reemerging and surviving both to then home locations, of be set would fixed locations a these favour consistently rivers, funda- and locational mountains, nature coastlines, first as if the such First, mentals, event, scenarios. three this of In one follow intact. may remains locations network town of urban evolution similar initially an while restarts, and out wiped millennia. two over Europe new northwestern a of develop parts we in towns analysis, of our locations out the carry tracks which to dataset, order In fundamentals. locational terms nature in first locations their towns’ of improves reconfiguration a in such reconfigures whether start examine fresh also a We gets locations. that new network urban an shock, devastating a such of aftermath the in is France. what in in towns not the but out Britain, wiped now which CE, millennium Western first the the of of middle collapse the the around study Empire we Roman Specifically, network. urban an eliminate to large sufficiently longer no are emergence their to led that important. factors develop the cities when once even that persist show they (2012) locations, Lin particular and Bleakley in time, same the pinning At in cities. role of important location the an down play gen- fundamentals has locational This that evidence shocks. as and from interpreted Davis recover been to and erally back resilient going remarkably literature, are growing cities a that years finds recent (2002), in Weinstein But where. – devastated so are if that and cities relocate, whether observe. then examine do might we one that mislocated, are costs cities the whether offset investigate could To quantify mislocated, cannot fact we in are that cities advantages whether or locational tell markets because to world difficult to is it access But poor hazards. by environmental hampered by are threatened others situated, well appear cities some While 1 nti ae etpclyrfrt tws hncnieigodr-adotnsalr-peusr fcities. of precursors - smaller often and - older considering when "towns" to refer typically we paper this In u ol sicesnl raie,wt ag iislctdi aydfeetenvironments. different many in located cities large with urbanized, increasingly is world Our Accepted is network urban an if happen may what considering by investigation empirical our begin We was that shock a of locations urban on impact the examining by literature this to contribute We Article 1 eae otebs forkolde h rtt xmn whether examine to first the knowledge, our of best the to are, We This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. eaaeyfo t atr rvne rmtelt hr etr.TeWsenRmnEpr newn eiso crises of series a century. underwent fifth Empire late Roman Western the in The century. collapsed third finally late and the recoveries, from and provinces eastern early its the from from separately percent 90 about by fell towns Roman-British major 16 in buildings private in rooms functioned longer no towns 450-600CE. its from and collapsed, order economic and social, political, Britain’s Consequently Roman permanently. departed security, and order maintained had last Britain’s which Roman legions, sacked, remaining first was itself Rome when 410CE, Around elite. its usurpations, against invasions, reprisals suffered and Britain Roman diverged. fates their however, middle century, the fourth Around the size. of and organization, institutions, their and of France terms in in towns similarly Roman developed the Britain centuries, subsequent the In Wall). Hadrian’s as north Rome far and (as France millennium, day Britain present first up the make that of those dawn including areas the urbanized, Around subsequently and conquered, era. Roman the to back Europe northwestern in locations. unfavourable in towns another some and leaving river), consequential, are flowing they slow which a in along or prairie wide and a small in are locations locations example between (for fundamentals inconsequential locational which nature in first one of value variants: the two in has differences scenario the third this Even dependence. path its to in due remain would locations counterpart original its while fundamentals, in locational reemerge nature would first out better wiped with was locations which network urban the net- case, urban this of In locations dependent. the path then are investments), works past of concen- value the the than (including productivity activity for human important of tration less are fundamentals these but change, value their fundamentals locational or nature first if Finally, fundamentals. improved with similarly locations would towards networks shift urban both then investments), past of of value concentration the the (including than activity more human their productivity or affect fundamentals fundamentals locational these and nature time, first over if change Second, value networks. urban both in locations of tence 2 h em"etr oa mie eest h etr rvne fteRmnEpr,wihwr administered were which Empire, Roman the of provinces western the to refers Empire" Roman "Western term The Accepted towns of locations the trace we scenarios, different these of relevance empirical the investigate To Article 2 eetqatttv nlss(alnr20)sosta h ubro occupied of number the that shows 2000) (Faulkner analysis quantitative recent A This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. smr iia oBian rwdnn tt nops l h rao otwsenErp htlay that Europe northwestern of area the all encompass to it which widening or France, Britain, of to north similar the more to is area continental the narrowing restricting or proximity; widening geographic including of checks, measure specification the many to robust is finding path This are locations dependent. town where above, outlined scenario third the with consistent is eras medieval and in sixteen to compared towns, Roman of site the France. near located of are two Britain only in example, cities for largest today; twenty visible the still are persistence in differences The times three Britain. approximately in was (circa than France higher Revolution in era Industrial Roman the the to of compared dawn towns We of the persistence until town. the 1700), Roman (700-900) a Ages without Middle site Early the the near from town Roman that later a find of a site finding the of near probability town the later by a to divided finding relative town, of persistence probability define the We ratio: day. odds an present as the towns to Roman-era eras medieval and Roman the locations from the towns and fundamentals of locational grid this onto 117CE. map in we death Europe, Trajan’s Emperor northwestern of on time Focusing the around extent, greatest its at Empire Roman the of area towns. of location the affected have may access these had as and inasmuch Roman), technologies, than production rather similar (Norman to elite common Ages a Middle by ruled High again the were during both France that and note we Britain comparing In Ages. Middle the reemerged during Europe grew northwestern and across towns as spatial network, the urban study an to of resetting us the allow of networks consequences urban urban two more these much of paths was in divergent there network The Empire, urban France. Roman in the Western continuity while the So of fall Franks. the by with over ended taken effectively were Britain and survived, them of many Empire but Roman Western remaining fell, the the when suffered even also century France fifth in towns the Roman of The middle abandoned. were the homes by and century, fifth early the to century fourth

Accepted Roman the between France in than more relocated Britain in network urban the that finding Our land the spanning squares, kilometre one of grid Article a uses locations town of analysis empirical Our This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. osdrbyfo h oa r oteMdl gs noreprclaayi,w n htduring that find we analysis, empirical our In Ages. Middle the to increased era transport Roman land the from over considerably transport water of advantage cost have the to appears important: change quantitatively this been that show we literature, history the from estimates of Using importance access. the coastal increased transport water to improvements technical dete- and the quality road Ages, of Middle rioration the during weather But all roles. in administrative quickly and move economic to major roads played the conditions) used (which army Roman the emerged since towns roads, trans- other these and to alongside towns, accessibility major connected its roads era location: Roman town’s the During each networks. of portation dimension particular obsolete? a become since on they focuses did analysis or Our towns, French medieval for suitable the still because were this locations was But Roman origins. Roman its by shaped largely was network urban France’s while ure, locations town Britain’s of France’s. to persistence similar observed more and the higher make actually these era all Roman late since of Britain, tombs in or not masonry, saints also durable are fortifications, results roads, Roman Our of survival settlements. the Age by Iron driven major instrument of we locations when the similar using are findings locations our town Roman France: and Britain in of Romans choice the differential by of consequence locations the town not are results Industrial the our until that Ages show Middle we the Furthermore, from again Revolution. Britain and in era, Roman persistence the locational to Age similar Iron find the from we France and France: in those than stable less perennially were that France driven changes) and Britain environmental not within secular regions are particular or results favoured histories our different that to show (due time also We over changes differential France. by and Britain in differ to and effect fundamentals, their locational for allowing directly controlling or Scandinavia; to controlling and era; Rome Roman to the distance during the status for administrative their or which areas walled towns, their Roman of of size the definitions on alternative rely using Empire; Roman the of boundaries the within

Accepted reconfig- to it allowed network urban Britain’s of resetting the that indicate above findings Our Article . o si h aeta rti’ ra locations urban Britain’s that case the it is Nor This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. rti n otenFac sls rcsl estimated. precisely less is France Northern and Britain to France and access. Britain coastal both (natural) in period this over dug were canals compar- many on Second, also but France. Britain, within and isons of France mislocation between the comparisons on on evidence only our hinge words, not other does In towns French Britain. as well empha- as to France important within is hold it it and rates, that growth size in difference sizeable a over is century This per years. faster both percent 600 in 10 subsequent almost the First, grew 1200 towns. in access to coastal advantages with towns economic France, provided and Britain access coastal since did, it that argue We markets. local their served better have would which fundamentals locational access). better locations with of kilometres (or 25 access within coastal being with while access) poor (or access coastal no British have their to than counterparts likely more were towns French medieval show we Finally, shoreline. circumnavigat- Scotland’s involved ing rarely examine, towns we these of that trade towns seaborne the medieval for The Wall. little Hadrian’s mattered of island south an is Britain that in fact time the over Third, changes on access. but coastal France, we and Second, Britain between France. differences cross-sectional and the Britain on between not coasts focus and rivers of abundance relative fixed for the account we in that differences means This access. coastal with area land of proportion the in differences accounts for access coastal towns’ of measure cross-sectional our First, geography. in differences fixed by the in change little was there period. that same meant the over history access Roman coastal network’s of urban weight the France in fundamen- locational a contrast, of given In value words, changing other tals. the In to era. responded Roman location town the British during slate, than cleaner - much river ac- navigable coastal have a to via likely or more directly times either half - a cess and two roughly were Britain in towns Ages Middle the 4 3 h ifrne ewe rti n rnea hl r ttsial infiat u nti aetecnrs between contrast the no case have this in which but histories, significant, statistically medieval are whole and a Roman as France long and with Britain between towns differences The French all are Autun and Chartres, Dijon, Troyes, u nigta rti’ ra ewr andmr osa cesta rnesi o driven not is France’s than access coastal more gained network urban Britain’s that finding Our Accepted access? coastal better with locations to move not did towns French that matter actually it did But Article 4 hs on hrfr a lentv ie erywith nearby sites alternative had therefore towns These 3 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. n nti epc u ae sas eae oNn n ua(02,wofidta itr of history a that find who (2012), Puga and Nunn to related also is paper our been respect otherwise this have In might they in. than locations worse in we towns that leaving dependence consequential, in path The is locked document costs. is their activity quantify not economic do which they into although drawbacks, locations some the have that may find and they Bleakley in nuanced: examined more case The is (2012) alternatives. the Lin which than into worse location no is the in (2011), locked Wolf is and though activity Sturm, activity, economic Redding, economic In of ours. location than the horizons in time shorter dependence over path of evidence study who (2012), Lin which shock, extreme more even an reconfiguration. of urban example to an lead show did do we But re- shocks. generally scale networks large urban from that cover finding the national contradict of not possibility does the paper and Our points, efforts. focal reconstruction natural as towns preexisting of role the rights, preexisting property out wiped investigate urban we entire shock the an Moreover, century. rendered a actually over for but but non-functional towns, Empire), network individual Roman Western damage the seriously of only collapse not (the did shock which a one of effect the study we papers, epidemics. or these war Like of calamities from 2006) quickly Troesken quite recovers and often Beeson activity economic 2008; local Paskoff that shows 2011; Roland and Miguel 2004; Schramm Brakman, and 2002; Weinstein Garretsen, and (Davis literature empirical of strand One 1991). agglom- Krugman spatial (e.g. of models eration to and (1994), Arthur and (1985) David by dependence path on work retical was canal a to connected (eventually) growth. being population Ages, long-term faster Middle with the associated in access towns coastal the have among Finally, not did prized. that highly were links transportation water that shows expense great transportation. water improve or facilitate 6 5 e lorltddsuso nGasradSaio(2002). Shapiro kilometres. and 1,880 Glaeser than in more discussion span related currently also 1200-1800 See from began construction whose canals French u td fpt eednei h oaino cnmcatvt srltdt h eia theo- seminal the to related is activity economic of location the in dependence path of study Our Accepted and Bleakley and (2011), Wolf and Sturm, Redding, (1993), Rauch to related also is study Our Article 5 h atta hs aaswr u n anandat maintained and dug were canals these that fact The 6 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. eivltws u osnteaieRmntw ie htwr ae abandoned. later were that sites town Roman examine not does but towns, medieval other and eruptions, volcanic earthquakes, flooding, many to susceptible world are the that across areas And to close infrastructure. lie transport due cities markets land world’s poor the and to position access landlocked poor by their hampered to are cities, Africa, its of of Parts some including cities. in example, concentrated for more ever becomes population still world’s misplaced the be as may today, towns matters and cities that conclusion the Moreover, costs. economic considerable millennia. even remain and may centuries, towns many over and locations inevitable, bad not in trapped is however, reconfiguration, This become time. that over fundamentals valuable locational more around reconfigure may Our networks fundamentals. urban locational that of role show changing findings the for account to us allows which time, over cations the day. through present Age, the Iron until the and eras, from medieval urbanization, and European Roman of origins the into window longer the much over a towns of location the tracks millennia. systematically two which of study, course far first As the Ages. is Middle ours the aware, in are starting period we the as study typically and 2013) Bosker al. et 2005, in Bosker Robinson and transportation Johnson, 2015, water Buringh Acemoglu, to access (e.g. of urbanization role European the of of studies development existing the time, same the At network periods. urban Roman later the to of relation the on evidence econometric systematic less urbaniza- much Roman is of there patterns tion, the examine 2011) Wilson and Bowman (e.g. studies some While 2012). city. located poorly a analyses of who example an (2005), as Glaeser Orleans and New Africa, of parts rugged in activity economic concentrated slavery 8 7 necpini ita 21) hc tde h feto h rnigpesadcnrl o oa rgn fsome of origins Roman for controls and press printing the of 2015). effect (Harari the misshapen be studies to which cities (2011), cause Dittmar can is geography exception whether An examines study related and recent Another u td sas eae otersac nteeooiso h oa mie(ei 06and 2006 (Temin Empire Roman the of economics the on research the to related also is study Our Accepted induced certainly almost has centuries many over activity economic of misallocation spatial This lo- urban of persistence the tracking for methodology its is study our of contribution further A Article 8 h e aae htw osrc soeo u otiuin,affording contributions, our of one is construct we that dataset new The 7 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. ieswsntesnilfrRmntwsi rti n France. centres." and half political Britain second and in the economic towns both to Roman were back for towns dating essential These and not the period). was 15ha archaeology, Tène rivers of In La area Gaul. late minimum of (the a BC conquest covering centuries his sites 1st during Celtic and discovered fortified 2nd he all the that describe of towns to Celtic used the now describe is to term Caesar by used name the Europe centuries. several northwestern in towns Roman towns. many millennium, earlier first connect the to of built centuries two were first that the roads During the emerged along towns functions other economic And serve other camps. to Still or primarily forts locations. military selected around newly settlements in civilian or settlements as Age emerged Iron towns of sites the near or for on client either built or tribes, were conquered towns for centres some administrative as areas, designated both were others In and 43CE). soldier-citizens, retired around (from Claudius emperor the during of later, century reign one the about began Britain of conquest Rome’s Caesar. Julius of leadership the der Woolf and 1990, Mattingly 1998). and Jones 1978, (Wacher proto-urban considered be can which in tlements, concentrated was activity Britain. economic and some France although conquest, of agrarian, Roman predominantly much the occupied Before technology Age eras. Iron medieval using early tribes and Celtic Roman present- up the make during that France areas the and in Britain towns day of development early the review briefly we section this In Setting Historical 1 concludes. 5 Section Finally, analysis. empirical the contains 4 Section data. the describes 3 Section account. into decisions their centuries, of for consequences locations long-term bad the in take people should trap and may make they choices the expansion that and aware creation be the should influence towns that of makers policy that suggests paper Our disasters. natural 11 10 9 sw ics nmr ealblw hl oetwswr oae errvr,poiiyt h os rt navigable to or coast the to proximity rivers, near located were towns some while below, detail more in discuss we As " (2005): Fichtl to similar for oppida world of Greco-Roman list the a into contains integrated which already www.oppida.org, colonies to some According with exception, an were France southern of Parts h eando hsppri tutrda olw.Scin2dsusstehsoia setting. historical the discusses 2 Section follows. as structured is paper this of remained The oecnurdms fteae htcntttspeetdyFac rmaon 85BE un- 58-50BCE, around from France present-day constitutes that area the of most conquered Rome

Accepted10 Article Oppidum 9 oppida hi oit was society Their (plural rohrset- other or oppida was ) 11 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. nnrhr rne hl u apeo on nldssalrtwsi diint hs oee nBwa and Bowman France, of in that covered with those were common to in 69,000 much addition which had in of Britain towns France, in smaller urbanization in includes Roman 222,000 France. that towns northern to view especially of and compared and the (Bowman sample Britain, supports more our evidence in or their While 114,000 inhabitants Wilson, 5,000 of France. with population towns northern urban Roman in an in suggest population minimal 2011) the Wilson of estimates recent Nonetheless, 2006). the (Mattingly usurpers time, of that series Around a in centuries. last the in with time Britain first left legions the Roman for remaining sacked was itself Rome and crossed tribes Gaul, Germanic into 410CE Rhine and Around economy its 2010). and Fleming elite, 2006, its (Mattingly against severely reprisals contracted and towns usurpations of series a and north the from Picts activity." economic on primarily depended prosperity whose centres marketing and ( capitals administrative network only a not and included countryside, the which in towns economy of villa rich century, a fourth with early flourishing, the was in Britain least of at province the "... (2001): Ward-Perkins by summarized Britain’s is Roman time 2000). the at Faulkner condition and 2000, Loseby until affected 1989, adversely (Esmonde-Cleary less century were fourth Britain in early towns the the while France, in accompanied towns were the usurpations of contraction and a warfare by The Empire. Roman the terri- into these back before brought France were and tories Britain of most ruled temporarily which Empire Gallic breakaway a of France. northern in those to coun- especially their and to France, similar in ways terparts many in were time, Britain in to towns lost Roman been the that has suggests towns evidence existing these about information much While concentrated. non-agricultural local activity where economic places still were but services, of breadth markets, a such had enjoy not towns did baths. towns and These Smaller facilities, entertainment worship, services. of public places schools, and centres, governance private local of workshops, range a provided France and Britain 1998). Woolf and 2010, Fleming 2006, (Mattingly trade distance long with thrived 12 oetwsi otenFac a ogrhsoisadwr lsrt h oa miesMdtraencore. Mediterranean Empire’s Roman the to closer were and histories longer had France southern in towns Some uigti eid hnteRmnEpr ece t eih agrRmntwsi both in towns Roman larger zenith, its reached Empire Roman the when period, this During Accepted of incursions suffered It Britain. Roman to blows harsh dealt however, followed, that years The Article formation the including Empire, Roman the throughout crises of series a saw century third The civitates 12 ,btas eodr production secondary also but ), This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. alsr(2001). Palliser Middle the during reoccupied Ages. being before abandoned were (York), Eboracum and important Cantiacorum (Canterbury), Durovernum is urban (Winchester), It as Belgarum later Venta zero. much (London), to reemerged Londinium which fell including Britain, it centres, in fifth towns the Roman of important middle even the that to by emphasize century and to fourth century, the fifth of the quarter of first the quarter from first percent the 90 around by century. fell a then about rooms for of stable number remained The thereafter and the 200CE, from around increased until number Britain this of that invasion found Roman He towns. Roman-British major 16 in buildings private in remained towns. for that room economy no agricultural level was the economic there In Britain an Age.” to Iron sank pre-Roman even the credit, in to reached hard that initially below is well that fact eco- a Roman is of this sophistications although the and, of life nothing nomic almost retained century, “Post-Roman sixth writes, and (2001) fifth Ward-Perkins the As Church of Britain, the 2000). (Loseby and 597 2010); around (Fleming until discontinued control was lost Rome pottery of as such items bulky of use in the trade fragmented; and highly coins became Britain in control political centuries Saxon ensuing and the Britain In Roman England.” between community urban now of “It continuity writes, real no (2006) was Mattingly there towns as that clear the and seems words, Anglo-Saxons, other the In of arrival towns”. the as before function collapsed to Britain ceased in had Britain Roman of towns two the or all generation 400 a of “within that writes (2010) Fleming conclusions. similar disappeared’.” reach towns, Britain researchers the Roman Other of time diagnostic that evidence In material other 411. the after and so industries or the generation villas, the the ‘in suddenly collapsed 410, and be- 380 difficulty with c. “...functioning tween Britain Roman of economy the that writes 1989), Esmonde-Cleary 13 vdnefrlf ihnRmntwsatr40Ei xrml cn,a icse o xml nFeig(00 and (2010) Fleming in example for discussed as scant, extremely is 450CE after towns Roman within life for Evidence hsws tapas n lwtomn o narayfaieeooy alsr(01 quoting (2001, Palliser economy. fragile already an for many too blow one appears, it was, This narcn uniaieaayi,Fuke 20)etmtdtenme frosocpe in occupied rooms of number the estimated (2000) Faulkner analysis, quantitative recent a In

Accepted13 Article This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. qae forgi,ec oeigoesur ioer,ealsu odfeetaelctosthat locations differentiate to us the enables of kilometre, size square small one The covering analyse. each we grid, areas our the of within squares towns for locations allows potential more which all a points, consider of leaving grid to analysis, a us around empirical dataset our our in construct We use B. we Appendix to that description data detailed the describe briefly we section this In Description Data 2 intact. remained part, most the the for 600CE, but, after contracted recover France to in started network only urban and the 450CE While by reset effectively fell. was Empire Britain Roman of Western network the urban when fates different experienced rule, Roman of turies bishoprics.” housed that those particularly Gaul, interior of cities continuity some for for case stronger made a be can . . Britain. (1997) in Nicholas ended virtually as . circumstances, . urbanization. these Roman In “Although writes, textiles...". and ceramics, wine, coins, amounts gold copious jewellery, produced of Franks... Ro- The of present... vestiges were Even production industrial-scale towns. and of economy modes money man a families..., survive, elite state Gallo-Roman the old and did administration too written so did but only not in Indeed, here, Britain. persevered in not economy did they and that culture early ways Roman to of fifth- components describes "...many (2010) Fleming Gaul: seventh-century fail 2005). not Wickham did and Britain’s, 1997, unlike Nicholas economy, the 2006, (Ward-Perkins and Legal continued; roles; use important coin play abandoned; to not continued were church practices Roman the rulers, Merovingian Un- Christian fragmentation. its political less der much experienced Britain, cen- unlike eighth France, the So the until 2009). under century (Wickham unified tury sixth the soon from were France tribes of most these controlled France which Dynasty, in Merovingian But control. seized (Franks) tribes Germanic nFac,mawie h etr oa mieas tuge n vnulyclasd and collapsed, eventually and struggled also Empire Roman Western the meanwhile, France, In Accepted cen- during similarities many had which France, and Britain in networks urban the summary, In Article This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. h oa mieadwsteeoemr evl raie,adSanadNrhArc,woesbeun histories subsequent whose Africa, North and Spain of and and conquest. urbanized, Muslim coastlines, heavily the and more to therefore land due differed was the and of Empire location Roman the the (2010). with Institute Research shapefiles Social The and Economic 2013). the from are al. countries, et present-day (McCormick Civilization Medieval and the a (b) or or I"); coast access ("Coastal the sea (a) a or of: ocean the kilometres into 5 flows which within river, navigable is defined) gridpoint (narrowly each whether for indicators construct allows This to 2013). us Studies Integration European for GIS Historical (using river navigable nearest the 1. Table in al. reported et are variables Riley other and our and (2012) these Puga for and statistics summary Nunn The following (1999). ruggedness, elevation these of Using measure a 2010). compute (ESRI also elevation we of data grid 3x3km a using meters in elevation of measure Luxembourg, Switzerland. Belgium, and Germany, France, Netherlands, Kingdom, United the within lie of presently provinces northwestern which the Empire, all Roman on the data use also we checks robustness our of some In and Roman eras. the Norman during on histories similar analysis had our which France, of and Wall) most Hadrian’s as focus north We far (as Britain Europe. Western of parts and 1979), Mediterranean (Taagepera kilometres the square around million 5 mostly about of area land a had Empire 117CE. Roman in the Trajan time Emperor of the death At the around extent, greatest its of time the at Empire Roman the of to locations, error. around measurement bands possible 5km for for account allow typically we analysis, empirical our have areas In towns time. which over in Wechanged way the tracing centre. of town impracticality the the of of because location mostly approach the this approximates take which gridpoint, a with histories. town urban each their in associate or we fundamentals their in differ yet and by close are 16 15 14 euemdr onr odrsaelsfo uott(03.W ontaayeIay hc a ttehatof heart the at lay which Italy, analyse not do We Roman (2013). of Eurostat Atlas from Digital shapefiles the border from country are modern provinces use into We partition grid. its our form and that Empire squares Roman kilometres one the the of of centroids boundaries the the are which on points", Data "grid to refer typically refer We sn egahcIfrainSse GS,w ei ihagi htcvr h nieln area land entire the covers that grid a with begin we (GIS), System Information Geographic Using Accepted to and 2010) ESRI (using coast the to point grid each from distance closest the calculate also We a compute We fundamentals. locational of number a on data GIS, using add, we grid this To Article 16 14 sw xli below, explain we As 15 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. nec ftecutisw s lse bv)aeetmtdt aehdfwrta 000pol n2012. in people 10,000 France. than and fewer Britain had in have towns to cient estimated are our above) (listed urbanization, use of we millennia countries the two where of around each cities), below.in analyses (including discuss paper areas we this urban as period, denote Since by to varies concentrate. "towns" towns use - of definition we population empirical paper and this - In activity Blair economic territory". in rural discussed surrounding present-day debates from use therefore see guished We example, Ages. Middle For late and early navigability. practice. the historical in in for rivers proxy difficult British to of is navigability navigability navigability of extent in the changes regarding in (2007) for if accounting even but possible, matter), as early as back dating urbanization of measures for urbanization searched post-Roman we considering particular, when in Fourth, France. and Britain areas present-day the up for possible make ar- as that and comparable as historians were by that definitions up town built for looked been we has Third, chaeologists. that knowledge reflecting years, obtain recent to in possible made where estimates sought of we concentrations Second, spatial towns. the characterize capture typically that which measures activity, economic wanted we to First, tried we criteria. millennium, of first data. number the other a into require balance back we urbanization time European in western back of further origins the look tracing to In order and in 800CE so from 1000CE, towns from French only covers towns source Britain this Unfortunately, (1988). al. et Bairoch of estimates of B. variety Appendix in a detail from more location, in approximate discuss and we as name earlier sources, by in identified matching are for which basis of the most as sites, towns and modern the towns with grid the use its then to We town point. each assign grid we nearest and Gazetteer, coordinates, World town’s the each use identify We to sources, 2012. other in by more complemented or 10,000 modern of of populations analysis estimated our with focus those We on population. towns 2012 town’s each of estimate an provides website agencies. which the (2012), statistical Gazetteer national World official the from is data cities) population (including compiles towns modern on data of source main Our II"). access ("Coastal rivers navigable of definition broader a using except same, 20 19 18 17 hnlr(97 rvdserirpplto siae o oetwsaon h ol,btmnin eyfwan- few very mentions but world, the towns around the of towns smallest some The for France. estimates in population 1,000 earlier and provides Kingdom (1987) United Chandler the in units such 1,000 distin- contains as site the area example, settled For compactly "a of is dictionary (2013) Merriam-Webster that the for in "town" era of Roman definitions the the (or of Ages One Middle the since changed have rivers some of shapes the that acknowledge We aigdsusdtemaueeto h eri,w o eciehww esr towns. measure we how describe now we terrain, the of measurement the discussed Having Accepted the us, before researchers many like use, we towns of populations historical the reconstructing In Article 19 ae nteeofiildata official these on Based 17 20 18 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. mie(egc n udnni) h al lososta h oa on nBianwr quite were Britain in towns Roman the that Roman shows the also of table provinces The the Trajan Lugdunensis). separately two and reports (Belgica the Empire also using table defined France, the northern of in C towns Panel Roman of France. number in towns Roman 167 Roman and 74 Britain includes sample in baseline towns our shows, A1 Table Appendix mostly As buildings, commercial. of and range residential limited more a had typically towns of smaller range whereas broad a functions, served economic that buildings residential and in commercial, towns civil, had Roman France larger and particular, Britain In as both empire. France, the and within Britain areas in neighbouring towns from expect Roman might the one between similarities many reveal detail, some in town France. in for sizes (2001), Bedon various and of main Britain, towns of the Roman towns" for "small the (1995) for Wacher (1990) Wacher references: and Burnham classical Britain, using of towns towns Roman for indicator (baseline) an first Our is definitions. measure different three use one instead just but on town", rely "Roman not a do definition we problem, particular this mitigate To towns. of lists different at arrive and differently, urbanization. British which of Britain, harbingers in as settlements seen Age be Iron may important other locate to (1990) Mattingly Fichtl and from Jones data use also use we settlements, pre-Roman main Age the Iron on of (2005) location the capture such To proto-urban), (or use. urban coin as Celtic recognize as might by we populated that largely features with was settlements which some world, had this tribes, Nevertheless, world. pre-urban a largely was era. pre-Roman the with and starting Britain analysis, both statistical in meaningful sites a of facilitate handful to a France, than more covered that definitions for aimed wher- Finally, we ones. possible, fully-fledged ever not and proto-towns only time the at were locations the cases some 21 eaegaeu oGe ol n eeoeGomnfrteravc nteedt sources. data these on advice their for Goodman Penelope and Woolf Greg to grateful are We oeshlr eg ahr17 n ol 98 ocueta r-oa otwsenEurope northwestern pre-Roman that conclude 1998) Woolf and 1978 Wacher (e.g. scholars Some Accepted towns Roman define authors different that challenge the face we towns, Roman-era measuring In Article oppida hssuc it 107 lists source This . 21 hs ore,wihdsrb h rhelg feach of archaeology the describe which sources, These oppida nFac,btol 11 only but France, in oppida nBian owe so Britain, in This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. eto otwsenErp EmneCer 03.W ou u nlsso on ihdfne ra f5hcae or hectares 5 of areas defended towns. with smaller towns list on not analysis does our Mattingly focus We since more, 2003). (Esmonde-Cleary Europe northwestern of rest because inferior. Britain vastly in were not towns and Britain’s France northern in survived urbanization that improbable suggests highly France is northern it and that Britain in towns France. Roman of of those areas walled from the dissimilar of too comparison not a Moreover, were Britain in Roman that of suggests figures towns these the of population, similarity their The of terms 2.78). France of northern hectares in in are area 30 walled which log of average 2.96), an of (with hectares and in 2.93) area of walled hectares log in average area an walled (with France log in average 58 an (with Britain in 38 number of more areas or walled hectares with towns five Roman (see shows, A1 people Table As of thousands 2011). eds., of Wilson, tens and Bowman most example at for and people 500-1000 least towns. at Roman housed of probably towns definition these baseline our to complement useful a Nonetheless, provides walls. town approach have this not did Marseille) (e.g. France in some especially and towns, differed; Roman have important may densities population walls the within 2007); Goodman outside (see lived Romans walls some town limitations: towns its into also but develop advantages, not has did approach that This forts Chester). garrison as (such to one opposed the as like towns, Roman approach, on this focus using still When we above, Europe. northwestern across towns Roman selecting for - construct to estimates. areas population walled these use often researchers unavailable, are towns for estimates population locational in differences pre-existing for control fundamentals. to us allows terrain. (below) rugged more methodology in empirical and Our elevations higher in located generally were France access, in coastal towns their although and Roman) or (pre-Roman origins their in France in counterparts their to similar 24 23 22 h aaw s nwle ra oefo eetetmtsfrBian(atnl 06,Fac Bdn20) n the and 2001), (Bedon France 2006), (Mattingly Britain for estimates (2011). recent Wilson from and come Bowman areas see walled applications, on its use and we data methodology below. The this see of towns, discussion Roman recent the a of For origins the on details more For u eodmaueo on sstesz fwle dfne)aeso on.Sneprecise Since towns. of areas (defended) walled of size the uses towns of measure second Our Accepted that sites on study our focus to wanted we towns, Roman many for important was defence While Article 23 eapyacmo uniaieciein-a es etrso aldarea walled of hectares 5 least at - criterion quantitative common a apply We 24 ahof Each 22 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. h esrso anIo g eteet ecie bv wihas nld rnAestlmnsta i o develop not did that settlements Age Iron include also (which above towns). described Roman settlements into Age Iron main of measures France for the identifier bishop Roman the use we so Britain, in bishops Roman-era of only. location the on uncertainty greater much France. for (2001) Bedon again and Britain for the in bishops had that towns century. Roman fourth identify to (2001) Bedon from data use We information. tional in are 46 which above). of defined France, (as total in France In 110 northern and checks. Britain in robustness towns of Roman number administrative limited 24 includes a dataset in our only them use therefore problematic We more also Britain. are Roman measures for these B, Appendix in discuss we size As evolving towns’ importance. economic captured and imperfectly they and time, over important less became designations either as " classified or was town administrative Roman Each themselves. Romans France. in only one with and study, Britain we in towns exceptions Roman two the with overlap not camps do legionary generally the also And (2015) Britain. Åhlfeldt of of in south areas reported the key and from France of away South located the as generally such are urbanization, camps Roman smaller military the Roman (2015), the Åhlfeldt among in that reported note Roman sites also to We correspond to urbanization. appear civilian Scotland) much in without other camps reports the military it and that Chester sites day major present the in of (one two Britain for example, For urbanization. importance by with sites closely of correspond classification not whose Barring- does 2000), the (Talbert World on Roman rely not and Greek did we the reason, of this Atlas For ton camps. military on not and character, urban an had 26 25 oeta hsmaueo r-oa rgn a nld eaieymnrstlmns n steeoedfeetfrom different therefore is and settlements, minor relatively include may origins pre-Roman of measure however, this is, that There Note uncertain. is bishop fourth-century a of existence the that specifies Bedon where towns include We uigisps-oa eid rm4060E rti a ofntoa on a icse in discussed (as towns functional no had Britain 450-600CE, from period, post-Roman its During addi- with definitions three these using towns Roman of location the on data the complement We the of classifications administrative the on relies towns Roman of definition final and third Our Acceptedcivitas Article aia"(e atnl 06frBianadBdn20 o rne.Teeadministrative These France). for 2001 Bedon and Britain for 2006 Mattingly (see capital" 25 oietf hte h oa on a r-oa rgn,w s ilt(1990) Millet use we origins, pre-Roman had towns Roman the whether identify To 26 colonia , municipium This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. it n et etre,bti sdfcl oietf ls oneprsi France. in counterparts close identify to our difficult is Given it but (2000). centuries, tenth Holt and in ninth discussed numbers the to num- compared the low millennium is second covers the it of towns centuries British few of for first ber estimates the population in and town onwards, reports 1000 reference, from standard only a Britain is which (1988), discussed As al. estimates. et population di- Bairoch of more above, form have the in we activity however, urban years, of later measures conventional For and rect France. and Britain post-Roman in recovery urban of and 768-1066). Carolingian (from in Britain pre-Norman mints in of to and location France difficult the post-Carolingian are describes who France (1988), and Spufford Britain from data both use in We by. activity come economic of measures good activity where economic local period of a of concentration for importance a and suggests size presence the their While considerably, varied coins. mints of early minting the namely Europe, medieval early in activity into window a urbanization. provide (proto) thus post-Roman bishoprics early The 1997). Nicholas and concentration 2010 spatial (Fleming a activity sustaining economic of services, follow- and their products and various bishops consumed The and life. produced of aspects also many ers for central exercised was bishops church the locations when these time From a at power 1995). (Reynolds 700-900 from bishoprics, as known ops), impractical. France analysis quantitative in a counterpart making no exception), almost rare a have being they (Quentovic and few however, Britain, Only in identified undefended. been typically have sites were such they although "proto-urban"), (and features as urban some described had sometimes emporia are These 2010). (Fleming Britain emporia in as emerge known to began settlements "wics") trading (or onwards, century seventh the From France survived. in towns while many 1997), Nicholas and 2006, Mattingly 2010, Fleming 2001, Palliser 2001, Ward-Perkins 27 ncnrs,brh eelcldfne ete nEgaddrn h eg fKn lrdadhsscesr nthe in successors his and Alfred King of reign the during England in centres defended local were burghs contrast, In Accepted stages early the trace to us allow they that is mints the and bishoprics the of advantage main The economic of location the to related directly more is urbanization (proto) of measure next Our Article archbish- (including bishops of seats the identifies urbanization post-Roman of measure first Our 27 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. rne nldn 8wt ,0 epeo more. or people 5,000 with 38 each including France, within towns largest the for indicators kilometres compute then 100 We by GIS. kilometres in projection 100 area of equal cells an grid using arbitrary compute we country, a within size relative of hierarchy. location size the town the understand in us threshold fixed helps a measure to up this towns France, and Britain between differs poll likely the most on (2000). based Dyer taxpayers in of reported number as the 1377-1381, by of measured taxes as Britain in town 1400, largest for 50 Bairoch by the reported adds as towns and 50 largest the takes measure This France. and Britain in towns of period. estimates that the for using (1988) do we al. as et more, Bairoch or people 5,000 with towns for indicator estimates an Russel’s construct From again Death. we Black the of onset the before 1300, circa populations town of estimate in towns for more or inhabitants 10,000 of 1800. threshold population additional industrial an the during use rapidly we grew revolution, populations town Since focus inhabitants. we 5,000 towns, least smaller at to with related towns problems on selection the of Because 1200-1800. from century each in towns early of location France. the are and of Britain they analysis both if quantitative a France permits in it towns 1988) small al. miss et Bairoch example from for excluded Book. may Domesday (it the drawbacks on its based has estimates approach provides this which While (2000), Bairoch Dyer from or range 1000-1200 this for in (1988) population estimated al. with people et town 1,000 any with using towns France, for or indicator Britain an in construct more we or small, albeit towns, of location the on focus 28 arc ta.(98 itol 1twsi rti o htya,icuig1 f500pol rmr.I it 0twsin towns 60 lists It more. or people 5,000 of 10 including year, that for Britain in towns 21 only list (1988) al. et Bairoch Accepted or absolute their of irrespective important, locally are that towns individual examine to Finally, populous most 50 the for indicator an construct we Death Black the following period the For alternative as (1972) Russell use also we analysis, our for important is era medieval the Because Article for towns of population the for source main our is (1988) al. et Bairoch limitations, its Despite 28 hl h ieo on nlddi hsmeasure this in included towns of size the While This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. h eivlbsorc.Hsoin aecmetdo h pta eloaino oe centres, power of reallocation spatial the on commented with have starting Historians era, bishoprics. medieval medieval early the mea- post-Roman earliest the three in our proto-urbanization) to (or towns these urbanization France. of of and locations sures Britain the compare present-day figure in the towns of Roman panels baseline three other the The of location the shows Panel 1 visually. Figure data the of examining A by era Roman the from locations town of persistence the of nation the shift to enough destroyed. large exogenously not is it but unless large, town be may they or inconsequential; and fundamentals small nature relatively first be in may differences scenario: third this improved to with variants one the two - are location There different a fundamentals. in re-formation it case to this leads In will town investments. the sunk ends past that of shock ag- a value by the place by in reinforced held be is may it this model reality the in in value but - glomeration, their reasons or historical fundamentals for nature location first its in if persists even town 3, the Scenario change, the In change value) follows. their town (or the fundamentals and locational time, first-nature over 2, again Scenario form the will In it location. town, the same destroys the shock in a if fundamentals even locational Here, 1, location. Scenario particular a In favour Roman consistently scenarios. of possible ending different the for by allows experienced one model the This as Britain. such towns, the destroy and could value) that their shocks location. (or for fundamentals town also locational of first-nature model in simple changes possible a for A allows Appendix model in This present we analysis, empirical our motivate To 3.1 Analysis Empirical 3 analysis our in errors standard the the (using cluster 2012 to for cells below. and same 1988) these use al. also We et Bairoch 2012). (using Gazetteer 1200-1800 World from century each for cells these of eoepoedn ihteeooercaayi fteepsil cnro,w ei u exami- our begin we scenarios, possible these of analysis econometric the with proceeding Before

Accepted Article Locations Town of Persistence the Measuring This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. egah fteRmnpro.BsosddsrieaogteBiih huhntaogtepgnAgoSxn,but Anglo-Saxons, pagan the among civitates.” civitas not old the though the to British, on relation the based much not among bore also survive counterparts were did British sees Bishops their their of period. those Roman surprisingly, the more perhaps of nor, geography 600 the c. by become emerged England had Ages, Middle the beyond move we population as precise because more is the This to years. later 1086-1200, from from figures towns of estimates population the especially and Britain. Roman of collapse the after time long a for France to compared or Britain people in is 5,000 lower This (with was towns more) larger common. of more number the far since are below, analysis mints empirical coin our while for noteworthy Britain, in rarer France. are and bishoprics Britain between early area) example, land to For relative or terms absolute (in towns of number the in ences see we again once and Britain. towns, in medieval than early France in to persistence more more Roman or of hectares locations 5 the of areas of defended comparisons with shows much towns is A1 there Figure France Appendix in while towns, persistence. Roman locational of more location the from different 1086-1200 quite from more again or is people Britain 1,000 in with towns of location the Britain period, in Norman early France. mints in the counterparts coin in Finally, their of unlike towns, locations Roman of The location the story. to resemblance similar little relatively a bear tells mints, pre-Norman of location the by France. (in- in towns Bishoprics does Roman of it of than location location more the the much from shows, differ 1 to Figure appears Britain of in B 700-900 Panel from Archbishoprics) as cluding And reality. new bishoprics the established to newly adjust the of to location had the and location 600CE, the by shifted cases already many had in centres but old power The missionaries, of early century. sixth the late for targets the in natural Church like Roman seemed the towns of Roman fold the into back Britain bring to I Gregory Britain. post-Roman in ecclesiastical, and secular both 29 o xml ete 20,p 5) rts Nihrtebudre ftehs fsalAgoSxnkndm which kingdoms Anglo-Saxon small of host the of boundaries the “Neither writes: 459), p. (2001, Heather example For Accepted them, prefer we imperfect, admittedly are Ages Middle the during towns of measures these While differ- by driven not is locations town of persistence in difference the that show also maps The Article imperfectly) (admittedly reflected as Britain, medieval early in activity economic of location The 29 oey(00 icse h fot fPope of efforts the discusses (2000) Loseby This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. n asn(01.UigteatraieCne 19)apoc scmuainlyufail ie h ag ieo our Conley, of Bester, size on large the based given is unfeasible and computationally (2012) is Redding approach (1999) and Conley Rauch, alternative dataset. Michaels, the and Using (2012) (2011). Hansen Lin and and Bleakley follows a approach around This cantered itself is which Paris, of suburbs (Lutetia). effectively town are Roman Saint-Denis, and Argenteuil, Boulogne-Billancourt, site, we Specifically, France. ratio: and Britain odds both following in the town calculate later a by used is town Roman a without) (and with town; Roman-era a case and this Britain; in settlement, a of site the for indicator an where by (indexed periods by time (indexed various points for grid specification of following section the cross a use We France. and Britain in locations town above). defined as France, northern in 13 still (and whole a Roman as near France located in are 16 towns to British compared 20 sites, top town the of 2 only similar: Belgica). strikingly and still Lugdenensis is of today provinces picture Roman France The the in covering 16 France, to of compared parts sites, northern town the Roman in of 13 5km (and within were Britain in towns only 20 when largest Revolution, Industrial the the of of 5 eve the around 1700, to compared through locations continued town era of Roman persistence the to in difference the shows, A2 Table As centuries. more many compared outcomes its France. in to differences the affected have could this and power, maritime preeminent 31 30 oacutfrsailcreain ecutrtesadr roso rirr 0 ioer y10klmtesquares. kilometre 100 by kilometre 100 arbitrary town on Roman errors standard a the of cluster 5km we within correlation, not spatial are for account which To France, northern in towns present-day top-20 the of three even fact, In eetees ent httedfeecsi essec ewe rneadBianlse for lasted Britain and France between persistence in differences the that note we Nevertheless, Accepted of persistence the of tests empirical formal more conduct Article now we data, the examined Having Y it sa niao o en ls wti k)t ae mdea rmdr)town; modern) or (medieval later to 5km) (within close being for indicator an is e it sa ro term. error an is Y it Pr = ( β Pr iewtota al oni sdb ae town later by used is town early an without site 1 + ( ieo nerytw sue yltrtown later by used is town early an of site β 31 2 Town hsseicto losu ocluaetepoaiiyta site a that probability the calculate to us allows specification This i + β 3 Britain i + β 4 Town i × t ): Britain ) Britain i + ) (2) , e it (1) , i sadidctrfor indicator and is i oestimate to ) Town i 30 is This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. eutn na vnhge ai frto n10 n 02 sdsusdi arc 18) u nig,hwvr show however, findings, Our (1988). separate Bairoch of in formation the discussed predate as long network 2012, urban and Roman economies. 1800 the national to in relative ratios persistence locational of in ratio differences significant higher even an in resulting 1. Table of in presented definition figures the narrower than a larger considerably with specifications from results shows B Panel kilometres square point. 300 over grid of each area to an cover closest bands 10km prox- these of that measure note the We expand 10km. we to when 5km from hold imity results the that shows A4 and A3 Tables Appendix of A to us below. allows explain which we approach, as ratios controls, regression odds add the prefer we although results, similar yields ratios mints). odds opposite medieval the of where case cases the in and in bishoprics), (as medieval true the is of case the in kilometre (as square France per in towns later than fewer Britain are in there where cases in ratios, both holds odds This the Britain. France in in of high lower is equality and locations the town of reject persistence the tests where 3, The Scenario of predictions 20-40). the with around consistent than is smaller ratio times odds three about the or (where Britain, France in in 7-13 around is ratio odds the by measured persistence 3. Scenario by the predicted against as 2, different, and are 1 ratios Scenarios the by that predicted alternative as equal, are ratios these that hypothesis null the test and as town. later ratio a the odds near by the be normalizing to calculate likely by more this correspondingly is for site accounts town ratio non-Roman a odds that The probability chance. located by be purely might towns sites later town that Roman probability over higher near country a by is there differs denser towns is later network of the when density and spatial time, the because ratio post-Roman odds the this in calculate towns We of measures era. of number a denotes town" "later and town" town, "early here Roman and a specification), denotes baseline the in 5km (within proximity denotes by" "used where 34 33 32 uigteIdsra eouinteewsfrhrmvmn fBiihtws vncmae oFec towns, French to compared even towns, British of are movement they further hence was towns; there around Britain’s. Revolution than radii Industrial higher 5km is the for ratio During France’s allow that which predicts specifically regressions, 3 use Scenario below calculate we that ratios odds The Accepted Panel 2. Table in described findings the of robustness the show to checks of number a conduct We the 700-1700, from proto-towns) (and towns of measures Article different many for shows, 2 Table As ( β 1 + β 2 ) / β 1 o rneand France for 34 h al lososta sn orltosisedof instead correlations using that shows also table The ( β 1 + β 2 33 + β 3 + β 4 ) / ( β 1 + β 3 ) o Britain, for 32 We This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. vna hsct elit ai eln uigteMdl gs n o itnet ie onfuddi emr in reported Denmark authors). pattern the in general from founded The available town are period. a results this Ribe, (the during controls to Scandinavia these distance include of for we fortunes and when rising Ages, persists the Middle 3 Table reflects the in which Rome, during to ages, decline distance middle the rapid for early into controls the added fell point-by- have city we the square Specifically, this consider one analyse. as we therefore than even that We area more the error. outside span located measurement specification. importance often political preferred to Towns a prone as is Paris). than rather point to check, grid Lutetia robustness precise a and as the London analysis of point to coding Londinium the matching and kilometre, (e.g. time over towns that Britain in areas favoured era on medieval results the our during technology affect or may climate This in economy. changes if local persistence their with along size absolute in declined they if even fundamentals. locational observed in differences by the driven to not compared is locations France in town era of Roman persistence higher similar, the again that are showing findings stronger, Our even perhaps Britain. and in differ of to measures effects for their directly allow control we and now fundamentals, that locational except baseline, the in as specification same the Panel uses Finally, previously H France. in and towns Britain present-day some in locate differed potentially to have decision may This which Romans’ sites, the unsettled baseline. by the driven to not similar are are results our that that results shows with origins, baseline pre-Roman the with restricts those G Panel to status. towns administrative Roman an had have Ro- to 24 known only are because Britain perhaps in cases, towns all man in not although significant, mostly between still differences are the France Here and towns. Britain administrative Roman only same using the time is this F but Panel baseline, baseline. the the as to similar Roman again the are of results parts the and the Europe, all northwestern to same in coverage the Empire geographical uses the expands E but Panel D, Panel starker. as slightly towns of even definition perhaps and differences similar, the this again are but and France more, baseline, and or our Britain hectares in 5 between of as areas specification defended same with the towns use Roman only we using D time Panel In are estimates baseline. our again the and to Britain, similar to similar very more are which regions, northern its to significant. France and in large area are France and Britain again and between periods, differences different in the towns by used was point same the whether at only looking proximity, 36 35 ehv lotse hte u aeierslsaerbs ocnrligfrdsac ocnrso cnmcand economic of centres to distance for controlling to robust are results baseline our whether tested also match have we We way the to due is this but France, and Britain in persistence of estimates higher much yields approach This Accepted important locally remained have may Britain in sites town Roman that is concern particular One Article 35 nPnlCw etitthe restrict we C Panel In 36 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. uvvdbte hni atr rti sefreapeMtigy20 n lmn 00.Ti gi ugssta there that suggests again This 2010). persistence. Fleming town and of 2006 pattern regional Mattingly in example determinism for geographic (see Table no Britain is of eastern in (1) than column better survived As conquest. Roman the to prior existed which defences, some with typically as known more was collapse the where Britain, in 2SLS severe. especially in estimates, result OLS might the this than era, larger are post-Roman that volatile estimates the in towns people medieval for became sites refuge Age provided Iron they some because If towns. later Roman or served medieval also serve they to because likely only more were towns sites Britain Age in Iron way that similar assume however, a does, in It sites France. town and chose Romans the location. that town assumption Roman the for relaxes instrument approach an this This as address settlements To Age Iron settlements. pre-Roman pre-existing major certain use on we concern towns build to selected only concerned Romans be might the one that again but origins, pre-Roman our with that towns saw only already using We to robust continent. were the findings in and Britain in differed reasons, military for perhaps have, essentially picture the leaves in regions than unchanged. northern Britain its to in France lower in is areas the locations restricting town before, of As persistence France. the measure this using even that show A5 100 each largest in the for town indicators outcomes as our using affect above, those may to reallocation similar specifications regional estimate that we results, concern the address northern to in Nonetheless, than Midlands Wales. Britain, the and in and England towns England of southern in concentration concentrated regional more the remaining in towns shift with marked no inspection suggests casual however, A 1, France. Figure in change of regional less inducing perhaps while towns, Roman few had 37 eas oeta nwsenadnrhr rti ept hi itnefo oe-termat fRmnlife Roman of remnants the - Rome from distance their despite - Britain northern and western in that note also We Accepted settlements Age Iron important of location the identify first we instruments, our construct To may locations town of choice Roman that Article is strategy identification our for concern potential One oppida 37 Fct 05.A edsusaoe hs eefclpit o cnmcactivity, economic for points focal were these above, discuss we As 2005). (Fichtl × 0 ioer qaecutri ifrn onsi ie h eut nTable in results The time. in points different in cluster square kilometre 100 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. oe h on siae r o l nte[,]rnea nteOSmdlaoe lhuhi rcieee h two the towns. even its practice of size in relative although the in above, changes model fewer experienced OLS coal-abundant, the less is in which as France, rapidly. range [0,1] the zero. Two- in to use non-saturated close all a very we from not are derived when estimates are are similar negative estimates estimates variables very instrumental point are these since the results that model note the also We although (2SLS). estimation, Squares Least (LIML) Stage Likelihood Maximum Information Limited persistence similar show likewise request) on authors the from (available towns baseline Roman and around Revolution. 1700, Industrial until the 1200 re- of from dawn results, Britain the The in location towns. town in Roman persistence of similar instead show A8, 1200 Table in in ported more or people 5,000 using with (1) towns equation for in as indicator specifications an estimate when we did this, Britain examine To as severe fell. as Empire shock Roman Western a the underwent neither when periods in France’s to similar is that in differences by driven not era. Roman is the era in Roman made choices the locational from that locations suggest results town these of then, persistence Overall, in above. difference 0.36, estimates the OLS around the averages in town France’s) 0.3 all of by Across average divided an cases. (Britain’s to compared the ratios of of 12 ratio of the out 700-1700, 7 from the in measures and only noisier other are each estimates from the different although significantly Britain, are in ratios than France in higher still is persistence location The town above. of discussed reasons the for perhaps estimates, OLS the than persistence higher for instruments excluded as towns Roman-era of location the Britain. for in power predictive (3) stronger columns have As these show, 1990). A6 Mattingly Table and of (Jones (4) location Britain and the in settlements on Age data Iron use major also of therefore set We broader a Britain. of in oppida 11 only were there because But probably France. in of towns power Roman statistical of the location shows, the (2) of column predictor as good a is oppida of location the shows, A6 39 38 uigteIdsra eouin on nteMdad n otenEgad seilyna oled,grew coalfields, near especially England, northern and Midlands the in towns Revolution, Industrial the use During therefore We strong. very not are instruments the that suggesting 9.7, around is F-statistic joint stage first The Accepted persistence locational showed network urban Britain’s whether is examine we question Another Article (1990) Mattingly and Jones and (2005) Fichtl from settlements Age Iron of location the use We Roman i and 39 iia et oprn h oain fIo g settlements Age Iron of locations the comparing tests Similar Roman oppida i × npeitn onlctosi rti sweaker, is Britain in locations town predicting in Britain i . 38 h SSetmtsi al 7show A7 Table in estimates 2SLS The This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. rvdueu vnfu etre fe h onte eebitt ev a esdt function. to ceased had which serve walls, to Roman built surviving were the they by town provided around the safety by after pop- the function centuries into a to four moved with population even ceased network, the useful town century, road proved ninth Roman its the The trading of in undefended centre raids 2006). Viking an the ing later Mattingly at years 2010; lay 150 (Fleming around and 30,000 and Britain, 450CE, reached Roman have of may town which main ulation the into developed France. eventually and which Britain both in percent 80 over just was kilometres 5 within London. medieval of case the in as later, centuries many use towns, into put their connected which 2010). and (Fleming Anglo-Saxons Romans, the the serve by to built survived roads the of example some for Second, (see towns 1995). Roman in Wacher former First, the in dwell sites. to some continued to populations non-urban back cases other population some consider attracted should which we advantage, Britain, natural in than sites besides town reasons, Roman of persistence the evaluating to nec- In ceased this town is Roman function? But the after estimates. long our population attracted of fundamentals most locational in because 1 essarily than larger significantly still is persistence this France) Britain. and France between locations urban of therefore persistence would in differences present, the if understate error, to measurement us of cause type on This Britain in developed. towns towns Roman later likely no most are sites missing whose be may we that towns Roman any areas, than towns rural present-day in in common more are which towns excavations, Roman during on incidentally evidence up evidence comes archaeological often written Since more discussion). is further for there B because Appendix now Britain, (see are France to that for applicable towns more Roman probably some is for concern account This to unable lost. be might we that is Nevertheless, concern network. urban potential Roman one the of picture a together pieced rigorously have who ologists, been the have of to locations fall town France’s. the to its during similar of persistence towns the Britain’s expected of have collapse might we the Empire, for Roman Western not it were Therefore, countries. both in 41 40 odnwsnttest fayipratpeRmnIo g eteet twsteRmn h ul Londinium, built who Romans the was It settlement. Age Iron pre-Roman important road any Roman a of finding site of the probability not the was 1086-1200, from London people 1,000 least at with towns medieval of measure our For u cnmti nlsso onlctosbid ntewr fmn itrasadarchae- and historians many of work the on builds locations town of analysis econometric Our Accepted to (compared Britain in low is locations town Roman-era of persistence the that find we While Article emporium 40 hr,sm oa al uvvdadwere and survived walls Roman some Third, eeoe e ioersotieiswls Follow- walls. its outside kilometres few a developed 41 orh vnwe buildings when even Fourth, This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. an lasdvlpdi h ideAe ett h bnoe euaim n t eivlcterlue oeof some uses cathedral medieval its and Verulamium, abandoned the to next Ages Middle masonry. Verulamium’s the in developed Albans Saint time. over costs changes trade the in to related is Our which advantage, era. locational Roman particular the a on to focuses compared below era, analysis empirical that in productive more become had that towns locations British in medieval formed that argue We predecessor? reconfigure Roman Empire, its Roman than locations the of of set fall different a the around by reset was which network, urban Britain’s did why But 3.2 location. geographic favourable their by disease only of driven outbreaks be or war not from may recovering in cities of success the 2005). that (Wickham believe to upheld reason longer is no there Thus were era Roman the from rights but property destroyed; Britain are post-Roman buildings in when even population attract may are land towns for modern rights when property Moreover, devastated, networks. transportation of cultural part their were of they because because population or legacies, attract subsequently have may Modern shocks these 2002). Weinstein to and subjected Davis cities (e.g. shocks devastating suffered that cities modern in sistence coasts. in and persistence rivers as if such Britain features, in natural than by only higher driven times been three had than Britain loca- more town much of been persistence have the may token, France same in the tions By may suggest. onwards estimates era our Roman than the lower from even Britain been in have towns of persistence locational the trace, any leaving towns. into developed became sometimes later which saints, sites, Christian pilgrimage early medieval to home were which towns, Roman us- some provided Finally, still masonry. sometimes able they dereliction, of centuries after serviceable longer no were walls and 42 h ono an lasbastenm fa al hita atr h ie nteRmntw fVerulamium. of town Roman the in lived who martyr, Christian early an of name the bears Albans Saint of town The l hs osdrtossgetta ftetwso oa rti a enwpdotwithout out wiped been had Britain Roman of towns the if that suggest considerations these All uigteRmnea h oa rypae nipratrl namnsrtn n securing and administrating in role important an played army Roman the era, Roman the During per- of studies recent other to findings our comparing when important also is consideration This

Accepted Reconfigured Network Urban Britain’s Why Article 42 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. rys io,Cate,adAtni rne hc did. which France, in Autun and Chartres, Dijon, Troyes, major a longer no were cen- raids problem. and eleventh France, late and the Britain of By most controlled raids. Normans Viking the however, to tury, vulnerable more access technology coastal new with this locations while, a made For also costs. transshipment (Brøgger reduced waterways have may inland which on 1971), Shetelig travel and to era. vessels Roman ocean-going the these in allowed than roads ships of worse Norse-designed quality typically the was First, era medieval reasons. different the two in for France, and Britain present-day in portation access. coastal without developed towns Roman many and aqueducts), using (sometimes (Nicholas barrier 1997). defensive a as serving cases some consumption in for and water opportunities, fishing with manufacturing, them and providing towns, Roman many dis- for Euclidean important given were a Rivers within have tance. areas may land coast larger serve the to from them away allowing being advantageous, been locations, actually nearby serviced which towns, these For markets. use their and hazardous, more 2010). as (Morris viewed sporadic were more was Channel English the and Mediterranean. Sea the North around the and in contrast, mostly In but Britain. transportation, and water France use course, present-day of in did, networks Romans urban Romans The the the connect so to conditions, network weather road all extensive in an reliably built and swiftly move to army order Roman in The roads services. and good goods produced needed locally buying in and - currency in taxes and procuring kind in in instrumental both - was army Roman The Empire. Roman the of parts northwestern the 45 44 43 icnr(02 icse h eeirto nqaiyo od nFac rmteRmneat h eivlera. medieval the to era Roman and the from towns, France medieval in roads become of not quality in did deterioration which the discusses Britain, years. (2012) many Hitchner in for Atrebatum Empire Roman Calleva the and of boundary Icenorum northern Venta the include defined Danube Examples the and Rhine the notably, Most oprn h otavnaeo ae rnpr vrln rnpr vrtm sa imprecise an is time over transport land over transport water of advantage cost the Comparing trans- land to compared increased transportation water of importance the Ages, Middle the In local served towns most ports, as serve did France and Britain in towns Roman few a While

Accepted43 Article u oto hs eet ol edrvdfo o-aial ieso te ae sources water other or rivers non-navigable from derived be could benefits these of most But 45 eod h hlo rf of draft shallow the Second, 44 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. nBian2%o h eivltwswt osa ceshdaRmnpeeesr n h aefiueapist towns it. to without applies 58% (France). figure and Britain same access medieval the perspective, coastal in and with percent another predecessor, In 79% from Roman were it. Looking a figures without corresponding had it. 8% the access France without and coastal In access with 27% access. towns coastal and coastal medieval with access the without towns, the 27% context, coastal baseline of approximately this with 27% Roman were In 43% Britain Britain on access. were in in coastal focus figures of town we emerge corresponding definition baseline to example broader the Roman towns our an France, a and new as of 1086-1200, for but survival from propensity vary, people of greater contributions 1000 odds least a precise at and The with access towns access. coastal medieval coastal with locations with town locations Roman in in persistence higher both (2015). Buringh and Bosker and (2005) US. the in century nineteenth the during were costs these high form: the of regressions estimate to data these use then using We other locations. the and town by locations, era’s begin town later We era a Roman France. using for one case grid, our the of was cross-sections this of not pair a or pooling whether and era, Roman the in than Ages Middle towns. medieval the and defended hectares with 5 towns of Roman areas the only using results, similar with comparison, similar a shows did. A2 half ure about only still France in while access, three coastal over had however, towns 1086-1200, British of By quarters access. coastal some had baseline France the and of Britain both half in approximately towns shows, Roman 2 Figure As access. coastal with locations towards works than Ages Middle High the era. during Roman towns the during for important more suggests been this have All would similar. access been have coastal would that costs relative its that likely seems it but France, medieval be water". by could transport land of by price the "carriage times that ten concludes than more and 1300 around England (2000) in Jones contrast, navigation In river transport. discusses river may than expensive transport more land times era, 6 around Roman average, the on during been, have that estimate (2013) Meeks and Scheidel Still, exercise. 49 48 47 46 oepeiey h rcin ftwswt osa ceswr 2(4 ecn nRmnBian(rne n 7(51) 77 and (France) Britain Roman in percent (54) 52 were access coastal with towns of fractions the precisely, More to due was era medieval the to Roman the from Britain in access al. coastal et with Acemoglu towns see of Europe in fraction development the town in for growth transportation The water how of discuss importance (2003) the Kohlhase on and Glaeser evidence more centuries. For many for persisted costs transportation high of importance The enwpoedt etmr omlywehrBianstwshdmr osa cesi the in access coastal more had towns Britain’s whether formally more test to proceed now We net- urban the shifted transportation water of importance growing the whether examine now We Y Acceptedit Article = i ∑ = 1 0 [ γ i 1 I t = i + γ 47 i 2 I t = i × Britain i + γ i 49 3 I t = i × Access 46 ehv osmlrqatttv vdnefor evidence quantitative similar no have We i + γ i 4 I t = i × Britain i × Access 48 pedxFig- Appendix i ] + e it (3) , This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. twsmaue n18-20 3710,adi 70 h nraei ttsial infiat while significant, statistically is increase Britain the in 1700) towns in of and number 1377-1400, sizeable 1086-1200, a in observe measured we where (towns cases three the For 1700. higher its until at least remained at and level Ages, Middle the to era Roman the from tripled roughly above) discussed France: in than Britain is: conduct we test the Formally, period. and area given a in location, given the a increased in access) town coastal a case of this odds (in fundamental locational particular a since much useful, how is by ratio us This tells it periods. later to location Roman a the in from town Britain a in finding increased of access probability coastal the without to access coastal with location a probabil- in town the a of finding ratio of the ity whether test we Specifically, periods. later to Roman the from access coastal are which measures, two our of either using above. grid described our on point each at access coastal and for periods, indicator post-Roman) an (typically later and Roman) (typically earlier the for indicators where eueteergesost xmn hte on nBianmvdtwrslctoswith locations towards moved Britain in towns whether examine to regressions these use We Accepted ratio odds the in reflected (as towns on access coastal of effect the Britain in that shows 3 Table in pronounced more was access coastal towards time over shift the whether test we Finally, France: for test equivalent an conduct also We Article Y it H sa niao o h oaino on(nteRmno ae period); later or Roman the (in town a of location the for indicator an is 0 : S H 3 0 ≡ : S ( ( 1 γ γ ≡ 11 01 + + γ 11 H γ γ 02 12 0 + : + + γ γ S 11 12 2 γ γ ≡ 03 13 + + + + γ γ γ 11 12 13 γ γ γ 04 14 + + 11 ) ) γ γ / / 13 14 ( ( γ γ − − 01 11 γ γ + + 01 01 γ γ γ + + 02 12 01 ) ) γ γ γ 03 01 02 − + + = ( ( γ γ γ γ 01 11 0, 03 02 + + H + 1 γ γ γ : 03 13 S 04 ) ) 2 / / = > γ γ 01 11 0, .(5) 0. H = 1 0, : S H 1 1 > : I t S .(4) 0. = 3 0 > and .(6) 0. Access I t = 1 are i is This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. hs on nBian n gi o nFac.Tedfeec ewe h w onre saani rti’ aor–i is it coast. – the favour of Britain’s of case in odds the again the in is significant increase countries marginally two significantly 1700) and the and in rivers between more separately difference navigable or The of coasts for people case France. to France 5,000 the in and in with in not rivers (those significant again than smaller towns navigable and larger much Britain, later to significantly in are For proximity is towns France rivers. Both these Britain of for similar. in case effects are effect the for The effects in the effects estimated the France, the significant. imprecisely - and marginally but Britain large Britain is in and across rivers coasts, towns comparing for Roman When effects (baseline) the to imprecise. compared and and 1086-1200) estimated from precisely more is or coasts people people 1,000 5,000 (with with towns towns dieval provide on we data use grid), we our First, on did. points it of that sample suggests strongly selected which a evidence, are below towns (since towns on effect access the on coastal evidence causal of no have more we there While is mattered? But actually access France. coastal and that Britain evidence in direct towns Roman for than towns medieval for important more France. in not but Britain in access locations coastal is towards with emerges reconfiguring that network picture urban the the with precise, above, are described results estimates the the or with hectares all consistent 5 not of and areas smaller defended is compares with sample A10 towns the Table only While Appendix using more. time this significant. but not France, still of it whole than the Britain magnitude to in in Britain unlike larger but somewhat is whole, coast a the as towards France shift in the France northern In whole. a as larger. is Britain in towns of number the where cases in the precision more that significant, with note marginally again or we significant Finally, either typically 20. is almost countries two was the which between change towns differential Roman was for measures ratio access coastal the the to for compared ratio which the 4, (for 1700 around in towns France Roman in as contrast, 1700 In in 7.5). around towns was of ratio 6, predictor the around a was good measures as access was coastal access the coastal for ratio that the implying 1700 in Britain the in of informative: magnitude also The is access. ratios coastal better with locations towards shifted is shows barely also Britain towns table French in The that significant. observe marginally we only but towns magnitude in of larger number even is the change the where smaller, 1200), in (towns outcome remaining the for 50 ohpoiiyt h os n rxmt onvgbervr eaaeyapa oices h dso aigme- having of odds the increase to appear separately rivers navigable to proximity and coast the to proximity Both Accepted probably was access coastal that meant technology transport in changes that noted earlier We France of instead France, northern to Britain Article of comparison similar a shows A9 Table Appendix 50 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. itfrBian u li 20)dsussteiprac fcnl nmdea England. medieval in canals of importance the discusses (2007) Blair comparable but no Britain, have for We list 2013). France de canaux today et rivières length des total (Dictionnaire the kilometres and 1,880 1200-1800, over from is begun were canals water- France’s of to 40 access least of At importance towns. for economic ways the suggests strongly and itself construction which costly canals, of France, centuries of many and maintenance of Britain product the both are in These exist towns. their currently of canals many connecting of kilometres of Thousands canals. of struction was millennium. access a coastal half no than more having over that prospects growth suggest towns’ results for our costly cities, most for important so not maritime where is environment an transport in back now are we if more even be But now 2007). (Rappaport may though weather, important, good as such where fundamentals, locational environment access of an coastal aspects of Other seeing advantage diminished. particular again has this now and transport, are land for we substitute so, good a If is transport road highways. and decreased trains access of coastal advent of importance the the with of and cost fallen, the have Revolution them Industrial maintaining the and since canals because building be may but This sizeable still precise. are less 1200-2012 and from smaller growth although for estimates The than access. 1200-1800 coastal from without century towns per of faster that points percentage 10 almost grew access coastal more with 2012. or towns and people 1700 5,000 until with specifications towns alternative all in for or data 1200), population in have we which for year (a 1800 until 1200 where type: the of specifications estimate to 1200 in more or Britain 51 h pcfiain s ifrn eso otos n noeo hmw d sacnrlteitrcinterm interaction the control a as add we them of one in and controls, of sets different use specifications The eodpeeo vdneo h motneo osa cesfrtwscmsfo h con- the from comes towns for access coastal of importance the on evidence of piece second A i

loigfrteefc fcatlacs odfe nBritain. in differ to access coastal of effect Accepted the for allowing , Article pop i , t stepplto ntown in population the is ∆ ln ( pop i , t ) = λ 1 + λ 2 Access i nyear in i + t λ n h hnei ouaini esrdfrom measured is population in change the and , 3 ln ( pop i ,1200 51 sTbe4sos h ouainof population the shows, 4 Table As ) + λ 4 Britain i + e it (7) , Access i × This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. a soitdwt ogl 0 oepplto rwhoe h eid grgtn hsup this Aggregating period. the over growth access population coastal more that 50% suggest roughly 4 Table with from associated estimates Our was access. coastal had all towns its if 1200-1800 significant. statistically and large is countries two the between table changes the in Finally, difference France. the in that shows locations suboptimal time, locally same from the away At movement no era. almost medieval was the away there and moved era Britain Roman in the towns between that locations show suboptimal A12 locally Table from Appendix in results The similar France. was and locations suboptimal Britain from in away movement the whether and France; the of whether said be locations; can suboptimal same test locally then from We away significantly suboptimality". moved "local Britain in for towns indicator whether an with (3), to access similar on coastal specification nearby for a use site indicator We the plausible access. replacing a coastal better is with there built locations been have suboptimal may these town in the navigable which towns a or for coast that a is from idea 25km, than The further no river. but 5km, than further as is location it a if define suboptimal" we possibility, "locally this examine To towns? French medieval near access coastal with consequential. fact in was location dependence their path in the that net- suggests urban access French coastal natural the with that locations towards finding realign Our not did access. work coastal no had towns French medieval many so that centuries. many for towns for valuable was transport water that argument they our canals, with of effect consistent causal are the reflect necessarily not eventually do access results in these coastal While results no) canals. The (or to access poor received access. with towns coastal growing for faster indicator that an suggest A11 of Table speci- instead Appendix in canals as for regressions indicator estimate an we using zero), (7) equals fication measure I Access Coastal (where access coastal oeaieterlto ewe cest aasadtw rwhfrtwswt or(rno) (or poor with towns for growth town and canals to access between relation the examine To Accepted from grown have would network urban French the faster much how ascertain to difficult is It locations plausible no were there that possible it is important, was access coastal if even Still, Article striking therefore is it routes, transportation water to access of value the on evidence this Given This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. o,adisritouto oBianbgni h atfwyaso h it century. another. sixth to the location of one years from few last the in began Britain to reintroduction its and not, physical their of terms in unsuitable more geography. even are could that this locations that in suggest stranded findings remain Our to them capital. cultural allow and physical more much and people past, more the many invest- in concentrate cultural than world and the around physical cities of many Today, value locations. those the in of made because ments and they people, because of fundamentals concentrations first-nature to poor home with were locations investments. in people’s stayed of towns result French the words, was other conferred they that advantage locational any France, Britain. in towns (un)likely Roman as as about survive were to France in bishops without towns Roman-era Interestingly, to day. up present and the Ages Middle the through the survive before to century, others than fourth that likely the more show were in we collapse, bishops) Empire’s Appendix Roman to the (home In bishoprics were Empire. which Roman France, Western in the towns of Roman fall the after France in roles life important town played followers in their bishops. and of bishops role discuss, (2009) the Wickham emphasizes and which (1997) Nicholas explanation, As possible and one small discuss relatively we were C towns Appendix when In Ages, weak. Middle early the during relocate not did population impact. aggregate French significant many of a access had coastal towns of lack the that plausible of nevertheless substitutability is it or But complementarity growth. towns’ the different about assumptions strong requires level network the to 53 52 hl oelctoshue motn eiiu eis eivlhsoysosta hs eiswr fe moved often were relics these that shows history medieval relics, religious important did housed establishment Church locations Roman some the While centuries, turbulent these during Britain of parts in persisted Christianity While u fRmnealctosipsdhg ot o rnhtws emgtwne h their why wonder might we towns, French for costs high imposed locations Roman-era if But Accepted in viable locations bishopric made considerations religious if even that noting by conclude We Article 52 53 In This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. oiista fettelcto fcte a aeipratcneune o eeain ocome. to generations for consequences important have may cities of location the infrastructure. affect urban that of Policies location the on flooding. decisions and of earthquakes importance the as underscore such findings ur- disasters, paper’s large natural Our to many the susceptible world, areas of developed in parts the located for in are relevant even centres And still ban may high. it are was, costs once trade it where as world, important developing as be longer no may access coastal their if persistent more even be ill-suited. are therefore become cities locations may major and Today’s counterparts, optimal. historical longer their no than is larger can location much it the if location, even given centuries a many in for concentrates there activity persist of economic location once the words, in other dependence In path activity. consequential for economic evidence as this interpret We access. coastal 20-30 roughly 1800. been in have larger We would percent population France. urban and France’s Britain access, coastal both better in with Rev- others, that Industrial than calculate quickly the more until grew Ages access Middle coastal the with from towns that olution, find also We access coastal counterparts. better French from their benefitted than towns net- medieval urban Britain’s whose that Britain, find in We case realigned. the largely however, work not, was closely This was France predecessors. in Roman towns their of location to the related Ages, Middle the We in recovered France. in urbanization not as but that Britain, find in urbanization ended temporarily Empire Roman the of collapse The Conclusions 4

Accepted Oxford of University Science Political and Economics of School London world developed the in While world. urbanized increasingly an in important is evidence Our without locations in trapped remained towns France’s that suggest Article findings our together, Taken This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. naeigUbnDvlpeti uoe h ideEs,adNrhArc,800–1800," Statistics and Africa, Economics North and East, Middle the Europe, in Development Urban Unraveling system.” nomics. Press. Estimators." Covariance Cluster Using Data 12636. Paper Working NBER Research, Economic of Bureau Latine. Union résultats des sommaire analyse et données de banque Press. Chicago of University Press. Michigan of versity Growth." Economic Trade, Atlantic and Change, Europe: of Institutional Rise "The 2005. Robinson. A. James and Johnson Simon Daron, Acemoglu, References rhr ila .1994. B. William Arthur, 2015. Johan. Åhlfeldt, Accepted London: to Baghdad "From 2013. Zanden. van Luiten Jan and Buringh, Eltjo Bosker, Maarten city European the of origins the and geography seeds: “City Buringh. Eltjo and Maarten, Bosker, Dependence." Path and "Portage 2012. Lin. Jeffrey and Hoyt Bleakley, 2007. John. Blair, Dependent with "Inference 2011. Hansen. B. Christian and Conley, G. Timothy Alan, C. Bester, National deal." big no was bioterrorism "When 2006. Troesken. Werner and E., Patricia Beeson, 2001. Robert. Bedon, Article 1988. Chèvre. Pierre and Batou Jean Paul, Bairoch, 1988. Paul. Bairoch, a:pp587-644. May: ora fUbnEconomics Urban of Journal aewy n aa-uligi eivlEngland. medieval in canal-building and Waterways 54:1418-1437. 95(4): iisadeooi eeomn:Fo h ano itr otepresent. the to history of dawn the From development: economic and Cities iia ta fteRmnEmpire Roman the of Atlas Digital ta e ils ors ilgsd rnea as romain passé au France de villages bourgs, villes, des Atlas nraigRtrsadPt eednei h Economy. the in Dependence Path and Returns Increasing (2015). ora fEconometrics of Journal mrcnEooi Review Economic American eèe Droz. Genève: . applto e ilserpens:8015 : 800-1850 : européennes villes des population La http://dare.ht.lu.se/ , 6 2:137-151. (2): 165 xodU:Ofr University Oxford UK: Oxford 5() 546-579. (3): 95 urel ora fEco- of Journal Quarterly ai:Pcr et Picard Paris: . n ro:Uni- Arbor: Ann eiwof Review Chicago: This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. isn d,‘h rhelg fRmnTws-Suisi ooro onS ahr,Oxbow Wacher’, S. John of honour in Studies - Towns Roman of Archaeology ‘The ed., Wilson, 600–1540. 1: Volume Britain, of History Urban Cambridge press." printing types.htm) Activity." Economic of phy 332-337. May: metrics Press. University growth." city on impact its and II War World Press. University Oxford una,BryC n .S ahr 90 Te‘ml on’o oa rti. London. Britain." Roman of towns’ ‘small "The 1990. Wacher. S. J. and C. Barry Burnham, 1971. Shetelig. Haakon and W. A. Brøgger, during cities German of bombing strategic "The 2004. M. Schramm, & H., Garretsen, S., Brakman, 2011. eds. Wilson, Andrew and Alan, Bowman, sod-lay io.20."ii eecsi h etUdrteHg mie,i Pete in Empire", High the Accepted Under West the in Defences "Civil 2003. Simon. Esmonde-Cleary, 1989. Simon. Esmonde-Cleary, Institute. Geological American USGS, DVD, GIS Global 2010. ESRI. ed., Palliser, M. D. in towns", medieval English of lists Ranking "Appendix: 2000. the Alan. Dyer, of impact the change: economic and technology "Information 2011. E. Jeremiah Dittmar, (http://projetbabel.org/fluvial/rica_index- 2013. France. de canaux et rivières des Dictionnaire Geogra- The Points: Break and Bombs, "Bones, 2002. Weinstein. E. David and R. Donald Davis, QWERTY." of Economics the and "Clio 1985. A. Paul David, dependence," sectional cross Article with estimation "GMM 1999. G., Timothy Conley, 1987. Tertius. Chandler, 1. Volume NY. York, New Company Appleton Robert 1907. Encyclopedia. Catholic 21,pgs14,September. 1-45, pages 92(1), , urel ora fEconomics. of Journal Quarterly mrcnEooi Review. Economic American orTosn er fUbnGrowth. Urban of Years Thousand Four h nigo oa Britain. Roman of Ending The ora fEooi Geography. Economic of Journal 2 3:1133-1172. (3): 126 h iigShips Viking The eteet raiain n population and urbanization, Settlement, 25:1269-1289. 92(5): abig:CmrdeUiest Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: wyePbihr:NwYork. New Publishers: Twayne . odn Batsford. London: mrcnEooi Review. Economic American eitn .. ...:S.David’s St. : U.S.A. N.Y., Lewiston, () 201-218. 4(2), ora fEcono- of Journal o 75(2), Vol Oxford: . The This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. oa mie nAcc,SsnE,Bdl on n abr,RcadJ . eds., A., J. Richard Talbert, and John, Bodel, E., Susan Alcock, in Empire" Roman 26-43. 68: Technology. of Institute chusetts York. New Oxon, 2012. September accessed Form," Urban Science. Regional in Papers Economy Political Checks?" 100-1600 AD Decline, in Towns 2012. August Oxford. books, ihl tpa.2005. Stephan. Fichtl, (ed.), T.R. Slater, in towns", Romano-British late in decline and "Change 2000. Neil. Faulkner, Accessed ec.europa.eu/eurostat. Countries. and Regions for shapefiles and Maps 2013. Eurostat. icnr .Bue 02 Ras nerto,Cnetvt n cnmcPromnei the in Accepted Performance Economic and Connectivity Integration, "Roads, 2012. Bruce. R. Hitchner, Galliarum", Notitia the in State and "Church 1978. Jill. Harries, Massa- manuscript, India.” in Geometry Urban Shape: Bad in “Cities 2015. Mariaflavia. Harari, Routledge Gaul." to Rome from - periphery its and city Roman "The 2007. J. Penelope Goodman, http://www.getty.edu/research, Names." Geographic of Thesaurus Getty "The 2013. Gazetteer. Getty on Terrorism of Impact The Warfare: and "Cities 2002. M. Jesse Shapiro, and L. Edward Glaeser, costs." transport of decline the and regions "Cities, 2003. Janet. Kohlhase, and L. Edward Glaeser, Housing," Durable and Decline "Urban Article 2005. Gyourko. Joseph and Glaeser L. Edward Residents Give Just Or Orleans, New Rebuild Government the Lane. "Should Allen 2005. London: L. 400–1070." Edward Glaeser, Rise, and Fall The Rome: after "Britain 2010. Robin. Fleming, h cnmss Voice. Economists’ The ora fUbnEconomics Urban of Journal 1() 345-375. 113(2): o.8() 9-2,October. 197-228, 83(1): vol. , avlecliu:lsopd e10a.J-.à1 p J.-C ap. 15 à J.-C. av. 150 de oppida les celtique: ville La sgt:Adrht 25-50. Aldershot, Ashgate: . 2(4). o.5() 0-2,March. 205-224, 51(2): vol. , h ora fRmnStudies. Roman of Journal The Errance. . ihas Byways, Highways, ora of Journal Vol. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. oa n eivlCvlztos darmc.harvard.edu. Civilizations" Medieval and Roman gallo-romaine 400-800). (ann. regiae Sedes Barcelona: eds., Gurt, M. Josep and Ripoll Gisela in 483-99. 99(3): vol. Press, Chicago of University 60-82. Road. Cowley Ltd, Press University ed., Palliser, M. 425–600, AD Press. Successors, and Empire Antiquity: Late 14: eds., Volume Whitby, Michael and Ward-Perkins Bryan Averil, Cameron, in Blackwell. World Pre-Modern the in Systems Road and ete,Ptr 01 Catr1 tt,lrsi n omnt ntews c ..400–600)." A.D. (c. west the in community and lordship State, - 16 "Chapter 2001. Peter. 2012. Heather, July Accessed www.europa.udl.cat. 2013. Studies. Integration European for GIS Historical ihes u,FriadRuh n tpe .Rdig 02 Ubnzto n structural and "Urbanization 2012. Redding. J. Stephen and Accepted Rauch, Ferdinand Guy, Michaels, 2013. Penguin. Online. Empire" Merriam-Webster Roman the in Britain Possession: Imperial "An 2006. David. Mattingly, of Atlas Digital - "DARMC 2013. eds. al., et Gibson Kelly Huang, Guoping Michael, McCormick, 1945. Ferdinand. Lot, England" Anglo-Saxon early and Britain Roman Late in towns and "Power 2000. T. Simon Loseby, Geography." Economic and Returns "Increasing 1991. Paul. Krugman, England." Medieval in navigation "River 2000. T. Evan Jones, 1990. Mattingly. David and Barri Jones, Article D. in 600–1540." 1: Volume 600–1300 population and Society - 5 "Chapter 2000. Richard. Holt, ai irii ooéChampion. Honoré Librairie : Paris , h abig ra itr fBian oue1 600–1540 1: Volume Britain, of History Urban Cambridge The ehrhssrl ouaine asprcedsctsrmnatal période la a remontant cités des superficie la et population la sur Recherches itoayadThesaurus and Dictionary adnMsahsts xodadCihse:Wiley- Chichester: and Oxford Massachusetts, Malden . nAlso oa Britain. Roman of Atlas An www.merriam-webster.com. , abig:CmrdeUniversity Cambridge Cambridge: ora fHsoia Geography. Historical of Journal h abig nin History Ancient Cambridge The xodU:BslBlackwell Basil UK: Oxford ora fPltclEconomy. Political of Journal abig:Cambridge Cambridge: , 26(1): , This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. ec rmGra Airports." German from dence Reunification," and Division Location," 375–398 Errance. Edition Paris: Germanies." des et Belgique Gaule la de - secondaires Confederacy." the in ness Press. University Cambridge 600–1540’, 1. Volume Statistics. and Economics of Review Longman. London: Century’ Fourteenth 409) BC-AD (175/150 Period Economics. Development of transformation." ors rni .2010. M. Francis Press. Morris, University Cambridge Cambridge: Britain." of Romanization "The 1990. Martin. Millett, Vietnam." bombing of impact long-run "The 2011. Roland. Gerard and Edward, Miguel, Accepted Evi- Location: Industry and "History 2011. Wolf. Nikolaus and Sturm Daniel Stephen, Redding, German from Evidence Remoteness: of Costs "The 2008. Sturm, Daniel and Stephen Redding, City-Industry of Case The Little? Matters It When Only Matter History "Does 1993. James. Rauch, weather", nice to "Moving 2007. Jordan. Rappaport, agglomerations des "Atlas 1994. eds. Brunella, Philippe and Mangin Michel Jean-Paul, Petit, Destructive- War’s Civil the of Examination Quantitative A War: of "Measures 2008. F. P. Paskoff, Britain: of History Urban Cambridge ‘The in towns" British of origins "The 2001. David. Palliser, 2011. Survey. Ordnance Article Africa." in geography bad of blessing The "Ruggedness: 2012. Puga. Early Diego the and Nathan to Nunn, Antiquity Late From City: Medieval the of Growth ‘The 1997. David. Nicholas, urel ora fEconomics. of Journal Quarterly urel ora fEconomics. of Journal Quarterly ii a History. War Civil 6() 1-15. (1): 96 xoddissertation. Oxford , itrclMpRmnBritain. Roman Map Historical mrcnEooi Review Economic American ot e n hne onciiydrn h aeIo g n Roman and Age Iron Late the during Connectivity Channel and Sea North h eiwo cnmc n Statistics. and Economics of Review The 41,Fbur:20-36. February: 94(1), 0() ae:843-67. Pages: 108(3). 41:35-62. 54(1): 2() 535-586. 127(2): 85:1766-97. 98(5): einlSineadUbnEconomics Urban and Science Regional otapo rnneSurvey Ordnance : Southampton o.9() August. 93(3), Vol. Journal 37(3): , This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. vrl ra adPrisadMcalWib,eds., Whitby, Michael and Ward-Perkins Bryan Averil, tives. Errance. Edition Paris: romain’, l’Occident et Germanies les agglomerations Belgique, ‘Les Gaule eds., La Brunella, - Philippe secondaires and Mangin Michel Jean-Paul, Petit, in Reseaux" et gie Press. A.D." Press. sity (http://orbis.stanford.edu/#building) World" Roman 1972. geneity." Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: ed., Rosamond, McKitterick, in 700–900", usl,Jsa o.17."eivlRgosadterCte. ai n hre Publishing, Charles and David Cities." their and Regions "Medieval 1972. Cox. Josiah Russell, hetero- quantifies that index ruggedness terrain "A 1999. Elliot. R. and deGloria D. S. J., S. Riley, church, western the of liturgy and law organisation, The - 22 "Chapter 1995. E. Roger Reynolds, adPris ra.20."hpe 3-Seilzdpouto n xhne nCameron, in exchange" and production Specialized - 13 "Chapter 2001. Bryan. Ward-Perkins, 1995. John. Wacher, 1978. John. Wacher, Press. University Princeton Economy." Market Roman "The 2012. Peter. Temin, Empire." Roman Early the of Economy "The 2006. Peter. Temin, Morpholo- Romaine: L’Aquitaine de Secondaires Agglomerations "Les 1994. Francis. Tassaux, 2000. A. J. Richard Talbert, 600 to B.C. 600 Curves, Growth-Decline Empires: of Duration and "Size 1979. Rein. Taagepera, Univer- Cambridge Cambridge: Europe." Medieval in Use its and "Money 1988. Peter. Spufford, the of Model Network Geospatial Stanford The "ORBIS: 2013. Meeks. Elijah and Walter Scheidel, 01:133-151. 20(1): Accepted History Science Social Article nemuti ora fSciences. of Journal Intermountain h on fRmnBritain. Roman of Towns The Britain. Roman o.3 o / 17) p 115-138. pp. (1979), 3/4 No. 3, Vol. . arntnAlso h re n oa World Roman and Greek the of Atlas Barrington odn Dent. London: :23-27. 5: h e abig eivlHsoyVlm :c.700–c.900, 2: Volume History Medieval Cambridge New The odn Batsford. London: h abig nin itr oue1:Late 14: Volume History Ancient Cambridge The h ora fEooi Perspec- Economic of Journal The rneo University Princeton . This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article is protected rights by All copyright. reserved. rde abig nvriyPress. University Cambridge bridge: Lane. Allen Press. University Oxford Oxford: Press. University 425–600, AD Successors, and Empire Antiquity: ika,Crs 2009. Chris. Wickham, 2005. Oxford Chris. Wickham, Oxford: Civilization." of End the And Rome of Fall "The 2006. Bryan. Ward-Perkins, Accepted Article 2012. April Accessed www.world-gazetteer.com. 2012. Gazetteer. Cam- World Gaul." in Civilization Provincial of Origins The Roman: "Becoming 1998. Greg. Woolf, h neiac fRm:Ilmntn h akAe,400-1000. Ages, Dark the Illuminating Rome: of Inheritance The rmn h al ideAe:Erp n h eierna,400–800 Mediterranean, the and Europe Ages: Middle Early the Framing abig:CmrdeUiest Press. University Cambridge Cambridge: odn: London , variable construction. construction. variable the datas of B a for description text and Appendix Seethe indicator. totheBritain itisidentical since Britannia, province Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. We do not include aseparate indicator for the Roman fullNotes: ofthe The samplethe Romanparts includes Em Town with 100k+ population in 2012 100k+ population with Town in2012 50k+population with Town in2012 20k+population with Town in2012 10k+population with Town in1800 10k+population with Town in1800 5k+population with Town in1700 10k+population with Town in1700 5k+population with Town in1600 5k+population with Town in1500 5k+population with Town in1400 10k+population with Town towns 1377-1400 50 Largest in1300 5k+population with Town (Russell) in1300 5k+population with Town in1200 5k+population with Town 1086-1200 between 1k+population with Town 768-1066 between Mint 700-900 between archbishopric) (or Bishopric Roman bishopric in the 4 town Roman administrative Romantown with 5+ hectare defenses (baseline) town Roman 1km within road Roman Lugdunensis indicator Belgica indicator settlement Age Iron Pre-Roman origins II location Suboptimal I location Suboptimal Coastal access II Coastal access I within 5km Coast Ruggedness Elevation (meters) France indicator indicator Britain Variable

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved. Accepted Article th century Table 1. Summary Statistics Statistics 1.Summary Table pire, which lie within present lie within which pire,

(906,075 observations) observations) (906,075 0.00018 0.01357 0.01357 0.00018 0.01204 0.00014 0.02255 0.00051 0.02070 0.00043 0.04191 0.00176 0.03708 0.00138 0.05674 0.00323 0.04998 0.00250 0.01551 0.00024 0.01491 0.00022 0.02598 0.00068 0.02462 0.00061 0.01207 0.00015 0.01104 0.00012 0.01858 0.00035 0.01748 0.00031 0.01667 0.00028 0.01552 0.00024 0.01329 0.00018 0.01084 0.00012 0.01216 0.00015 0.00958 0.00009 0.01051 0.00011 0.01198 0.00014 0.01051 0.00011 0.00830 0.00007 0.00951 0.00009 0.00872 0.00008 0.01146 0.00013 0.01051 0.00011 0.01467 0.00022 0.01381 0.00019 0.01421 0.00020 0.01524 0.00023 0.01252 0.00016 0.01323 0.00018 0.00985 0.00010 0.01123 0.00013 0.00017 0.01295 0.01295 0.00017 0.01376 0.00019 0.00997 0.00010 0.01136 0.00013 0.00017 0.01320 0.01320 0.00017 0.01386 0.00019 0.01082 0.00012 0.01173 0.00014 0.01631 0.00027 0.01859 0.00035 en t.Dv en Std. Dev. Mean Std. Dev. Mean 0.18 0.38 0.10 0.30 0.23 0.42 0.09 0.28 0.38 0.49 0.26 0.44 0.47 0.50 0.20 0.40 0.32 0.46 0.11 0.32 0.25 0.43 0.05 0.22 0.14 0.34 0.06 0.24 0.61 0.49 0.16 0.37 0.79 0.41 0.21 0.41 0.17 0.37 0.17 0.37 446 540 540 446 433 350 462 535 296 377 Full sampleFull day Belgium, France, Germany, Britain and France only France only and Britain (697,198 observations) observations) (697,198 et and 1 “Ratio France” measure urban persistence using the displayed regression coefficients, as explained in the text. Notes: The number of observations is697,198. Robust standard erro Test H0: Ratio Britain -Ratio France = 0vs. H1: Ratio Britain - Ratio France Roman town town Roman Roman town town Roman p-value Britain/France Ratio France Ratio Britain Ratio Intercept p-value Britain/France Ratio France Ratio Britain Ratio Intercept town Roman Britain town Roman Britain France Correlation Britain Correlation France Correlation Britain Correlation This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved. 1 1

x Britain x Accepted Britain x Article Bishopric Bishopric bishopric bishopric people in people with 5k+ 5k+ with or Arch- 700-900 700-900 002 (.0)(.0)(.0) (0. (0.001) (0.002) (0.001) (0.002) (0. (0.046) (0.058) (0.062) (0.054) 002 (.0)(.0)(.0) (0. (0.003) (0.001) (0.002) (0.002) (0. (0.052) (0.041) (0.055) (0.062) (0. (0.007) (0.002) (0.004) (0.003) (0. (0.033) (0.031) (0.040) (0.037) (0. (0.002) (0.003) (0.008) (0.002) (0. (0.036) (0.041) (0.041) (0.041) -0.000 -0.001 0.001 0.016 0.013 0.2 0.135 0.065 0.024 0.024 -0. 0.065 -0.364 -0.191 -0.292 -0.248 0.135 0.2 0.013 0.016 -0.001 -0.000 0.001 -0. -0.205 -0.159 -0.114 -0.466 0.001 -0.001 0.018 0.031 -0.006 0.012 -0.001 -0.000 -0.000 Town .6 042029054 .5 052 .0 028 0.169 0.298 0.504 0.542 0.352 0.432 0.249 0.564 0.365 .6 033035029 .3 012 .0 023 0.225 0.203 0.203 0.162 0.234 0.343 0.365 0.279 0.566 95 3.23.13.5 41. 33.25 31.81 33.32 9.91 39.58 10.93 8.62 8.08 9.79 13.12 6.52 9.78 10.93 0.009 0.007 0.007 0.005 0.006 0.011 0.012 0.009 0.015 0.018 0.023 0.009 0.0050.04 0.013 0.074 0.041 0.013 11 1.92.71.0 28. 15.00 29.47 19.69 21.17 .4 000006000 .5 006 .4 006 0.041 0.046 0.044 0.036 0.054 0.050 0.046 0.012 0.050 0.048 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.017 0.021 0.013 0.000 0.019 0.020 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.043 0.042 0.043 0.039 0.053 0.058 0.059 0.019 0.052 0.082 0.017 0.027 0.011 0.015 0.026 0.030 0.001 0.019 0.025 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 1600 1600 .3 .003 .3 .4 .5 .8 .7 0.36 0.37 0.28 0.25 0.24 0.20 0.31 0.33 0.33 .3 .270 .5 .2 .7 .4 .4 4.15 3.44 2.54 2.07 5.62 7.42 7.01 4.55 7.53 .6 .802 .0 .0 .5 .9 .4 0.12 0.14 0.19 0.25 0.20 0.38 0.24 0.30 0.36 in in

Table 2.Probability of towns(700-2012) within 5km ofRoman towns in 1700 1700 in Mint in Mint people Town 1066 1066 Coin Coin 768- with with 5k+ in 1086- in in 1700 1700 in people people Town Town 10k+ 1200 1200 with with with with 1k+ in 1800 1800 in in 1200 1200 in people people Town Town with with with with 5k+ 5k+ rs areclusteredto account fo people in people (Russell) with 5k+ 5k+ with ≠ c.1300 c.1300 people Town Town 10k+ 1800 1800 0 with with 001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) 001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.001) (0.051) 043) (0.044) (0.052) (0.034) 002) (0.002) (0.004) (0.002) (0.002) (0.002) 002) (0.002) (0.004) (0.002) (0.032) 032) (0.033) (0.033) (0.027) 001) (0.009) (0.006) (0.002) (0.001) (0.001) 001) (0.002) (0.006) (0.009) (0.047) 051) (0.060) (0.075) (0.070) (0.004) 005) (0.012) (0.023) (0.026) (0.029) 038) (0.038) (0.039) (0.037) 185 -0.127 -0.012 -0.141 -0.14 -0.14 185 -0.141 -0.012 -0.127 23 -0.249 -0.234 -0.107 -0.076 -0.076 -0.107 -0.234 -0.249 23 03 31.75 30.90 29.68 27.38 27.38 03 29.68 30.90 31.75 06 8.28 13.42 13.42 06 8.28 33.83 23.83 people in people people in people with 5k+ 5k+ with Town Town 10k+ 2012 2012 1300 1300 with with

r spatial correlation.r spatial“Ratio largest 50 largest people in people towns in towns One of Town 1377- 20k+ 2012 2012 1400 1400 with with

people in people people in people with 5k+ 5k+ with Town Town 50k+ 2012 2012 1400 1400 with with

Britain” and 5k+ people Town with Town with people in people 100k+ 100k+ 2012 2012 1500 1500 in in

which leads to the coast standard errors are clustered to accountfo Notes: The numberof observations is1,394 osa cesefcsi rne p-value: H1:(C2/C1)-(C4/C3)>0, Test H0:(C2/C1)-(C4/C3) France: (C2/C1)-(C4/C3) minus Differential change,Britain H1:C4/C3>1, p-value: Test H0:C4/C3 Change ineffect: C4/C3-1 towns (=C4) onlater onRoman(=C3) towns inFrance: Coastal accesseffects H1:C2/C1>1, p-value: Test H0:C2/C1 Change ineffect: C2/C1-1 towns (=C2) onlater onRoman(=C1) towns inBritain: Coastal accesseffects access Later period xBritain xCoastal periodxCoastalaccess Later Later period xBritain Later period access Roman period xBritain xCoastal Roman xCoastalaccess period Roman period xBritain Roman period Coastal town (baseline) orlater Dependent variable: Roman town This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved.

Accepted Article access measure: I II I II I II I II II I I III II II I measure: ≤ ≤ 1 vs. 1 vs. . ≤ Coastal access measure II: within 5km of the coast or of any navigable river which leads to the coast. 0 vs. (0.00002) (0.00002)(0.00002) (0.00002) (0.00002)(0.00002) (0.00002) (0.00002) (0.00002) (0.00016) (0.00011)(0.00016) (0.00011) (0.00007)(0.00012) (0.00014) (0.00018) (0.00011) (0.00005)(0.00009) (0.00007) (0.00004)(0.00008) (0.00007) (0.00013) (0.00004) (0.00005)(0.00004) (0.00002) (0.00002)(0.00004) (0.00003) (0.00005) (0.00003) (0.00002)(0.00002) (0.00001) (0.00001)(0.00002) (0.00001) (0.00002) (0.00001) (0.00012)(0.00018) (0.00018) (0.00012)(0.00012) (0.00018) (0.00018) (0.00012) (0.00008)(0.00014) (0.00014) (0.00008)(0.00008) (0.00014) (0.00014) (0.00008) (0.00008)(0.00008) (0.00008) (0.00008)(0.00008) (0.00008) (0.00008) (0.00008) -0.00028 -0.00018-0.00028-0.00018 -0.00028 -0.00018 -0.00028 -0.00028 -0.00018 .03 0.00031 -0.00001 0.00033 0.00044 -0.00016-0.00003 0.00001 0.00041 0.00003 0.00002 -0.00005 0.00007 -0.00009 0.0001 -0.00003 -0.00008 0.000090.00011 0.00008 0.000190.00006 0.00022 0.00006 0.00005 0.000510.00071 0.00071 0.000510.00051 0.00071 0.00071 0.00051 0.000190.00017 0.00017 0.000190.00019 0.00017 0.00017 0.00019 0.000190.00023 0.00023 0.000190.00019 0.00023 0.00023 0.00019 .04 0.0003 0.000310.00082 0.0002 0.000540.0004 0.00023 0.0003 Town with1k+people .2 .2 .5 .8 .7 .0 00 0.057 0.07 0.029 0.0590.0290.088 0.072 0.009 0.333 0.263 0.236 0.102 0.0983 0.39 0.2340.122 0.042 0.026 0.0590.0110.0270.076 0.002 0.003 1.82 2.21 4.66 2.71 1.13 2.14 1.68 2.35 2.211.821.68 4.662.71 1.13 2.14 0.05 0.160.110.15 0.200.30 0.47 0.41 3.89 4.324.554.71 4.924.84 6.04 5.24 3.71 3.714.104.10 4.103.71 4.10 3.71 1.93 2.37 4.86 3.01 1.6 2.55 2.4 1.83 6.3 12.18 6.36 6.095.897.49 5.41 6.64 1.87 1.872.082.08 2.081.87 2.08 1.87 r spatial correlation. Coastal access measur Coastal access spatial correlation.r in 1086-1200 ,396, since the dataset is composed of tw composed dataset is ,396, sincethe Table 3.Location ofRomanand latertowns Town with5k+people ae on Later town: in 1200 o cross-sections with697,198 observations e I:within 5km ofthecoastor ofama One oflargest50towns in 1377-1400 jor navigableriver Town with5k+people each.Robust in 1700

Coastal access measure II: within 5km of the coast or of any navigable river which leads to the coast. Notes: Robuststandard errors are cluste bevtos 77 77 72 74 65 41 119 77 Observations Coastal access x Britain Britain ln(population in1200) Coastal access 777274 5041 119 77 Observations Coastal access x Britain Britain ln(population in1200) rm 1200-1800 1200-18001200-17001200-2012 Coastal access from: population growth Dependent variable is Sample: B. A. Coastal access measure I

AcceptedCoastal Article access measure Britain and (0.165) (0.153) (0.155) (0.159) (0. (0.177) (0.171) (0.170) (0.173) (0. France .5 .1 .7 .2 .4 .4 06 0.538 0.464 0.67 0.551 0.611 0.577 0.424 0.349 0.642 0.600 0.631 0.614 0.424 0.312 0.595 0.542 0.616 0.505 II (0.480) (0.293) (0.281) (0.320) (0.318) (0.389) (0.286) (0.311) 0.195 0.236 0.687 0.247 0.313 0.156 -0.385 0 (0.151) (0.158) (0.161) (0.191)(0.173) (0.273) (0.124) (0.158) -0.229 -0.209 -0.116 -0.232-0.199 -0.124 -0.264 -0.183 (0.484) (0.297) (0.289) (0.338) (0.373) (0.436) (0.287) (0.308) 0.0618 0.145 0.629 0.105 0.176 0.0491 0 -0.467 (0.140) (0.150) (0.157) (0.188)(0.196) (0.289) (0.120) (0.151) -0.202 -0.195 -0.108 -0.222-0.179 -0.176 -0.251 -0.173 red to accountfor spatial correlation. Coas Table 4.Coastalaccessandthe growth of Britain and France This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved. Britain and France Britain and tal access measureI:within 5km ofthec France towns with5,000 people or more in 1200 Britain and France

201) (0.189) (0.251) (0.138) (0.165) 224) (0.248) (0.282) (0.156) (0.185) areas France, only Britain and of coastor navigable river ≤ 25km oast or ofamajor navigable Lugdunensis France, only Belgica, and Britain and Britannia, Northwestern Europe, all provinces Roman river which leads to the coast Britain and France . . 7 7 6 2 5 6

. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved. Panel A: Roman Baseline Towns ( )( A: RomanBaselineTowns Panel Accepted )B: Panel Roman BaselineTowns( and Medieval Bishoprics Archbishoprics,(8 and Article Figure 1. Towns inRomanand Medieval Times

th and 9 th century, ) century, Figure continuesFigure overleaf

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved. Panel C: Roman Baseline Towns ( C: Panel Roman BaselineTowns( Accepted specifiedin each panel for the Roman parts of Britain Franceand Notes: Themapsshow the locationof all the Roman Baselin ( D: RomanBaselineTowns Panel Article )and Medieval Mints (768-1066, ) ) Medievaland (1086-1200,Towns ) Figure 1continued e Townsin ourdataset and the locationof later towns as

. theSee datasection forsour

ces definitionsand of towns.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved. Panel B:MedievalPanel (1086-1200)Towns A: RomanBaselineTowns Panel Accepted Article Figure 2. Towns within and without 5km of navigable rivers and coasts in Britain riversandcoasts of without5km navigable withinand Towns

Figure continuesFigure overleaf

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. This article isprotected rights by All copyright. reserved.

Acceptednavigable arehighlightedin blue. access measure)for the Romanpart of Britain and France for differ or notwithin5km figuresare Notes: The show townsthat D: MedievalPanel (1086-1200)Towns Article C:Panel RomanBaselineTowns Figure 2continued ent yearsas indicated in the panel titles. The areas with of the coast orof thecoast navigable rivers (by the “Coastal accessII”