Byzantine economy

Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard.Workers on the field (down) and pay time (up), Byzantine Gospel of 11th century.

TheByzantine economywas among the most robust economies in the Mediterranean for many centuries.Constantinoplewas a prime hub in a trading network that at various times extended across nearly all ofEurasiaand North Africa. Some scholars argue that, up until the arrival of the Arabs in the 7th century, theEastern Roman Empirehad the most powerful economy in the world. The Arab conquests, however, would represent a substantial reversal of fortunes contributing to a period of decline and stagnation.Constantine V's reforms (c. 765) marked the beginning of a revival that continued until 1204. From the 10th century until the end of the 12th, the Byzantine Empire projected an image of luxury, and the travelers were impressed by the wealth accumulated in the capital. All this changed with the arrival of theFourth Crusade,which was an economic catastrophe. ThePalaiologoitried to revive the economy, but the late Byzantine state would not gain full control of either the foreign or domestic economic forces.

One of the economic foundations of the empire was trade. The state strictly controlled both the internal and the international trade, and retained the monopoly of issuingcoinage.Constantinople remained the single most important commercial centre of Europe for much of theMedieval era,which it held until theRepublic of Veniceslowly began to overtake Byzantine merchants in trade; first through tax exemption under theKomnenoi,then under theLatin Empire.

Agriculture

Constantinople apple quinces

From 4th to end of 6th century the eastern part of Roman Empire had demographic, economic andagricultural expansion.The climate was opportune for farming. Even in marginal regions rural settlements flourished.

Development in therural economy,though certainly slow, was continuous from the 8th to the beginning of the 14th century.Areas close to the sea featuring cereal crops, vines, and olive groves (the interior of theBalkans,andAsia Minorconcentrated on stock raising) were relatively well-favored, and appear to have played an important role in the development of the Byzantine economy. The peasantry's tools changed little through the ages, and remained rudimentary, which resulted in a low ratio of productivity to labor. Nevertheless, according to certain scholars, the permanence of techniques, and tools are evidence of their successful adaptation to the environment.

From the 7th to the 12th century, the social organization of production was arranged round two poles: estate and village (a collection of free smallholders). The village social structure was the organizational form best adapted to insecure conditions, with the estate fulfilling this role once conditions were safe again. There was in principle a clear distinction between tenants who lived on the estates (and owed dues to the master of the place), and the village inhabitants, many of whom owned land, and consequently paid taxes to the state. Nevertheless, not all the cultivators on the estate lived there, and not all enjoyed a special status. Some of them were slaves and some were wage laborers; references to wage laborers occur continuously from the 7th century to the end of the Byzantine period.In the same way, the inhabitants of a village would not all be landholders, and of these, not all would be farmers; some village proprietors held the lowest rank of aristocrat status, and were wealthier than tenant farmers.The distinction between landholder and tenant farmer (paroikos) was weakened once tenures held byparoikoiwere considered hereditary, and once someparoikoiachieved owner status.From the 10th century on, large estates assumed the leading role that had been held until then by villages, albeit in an economy that was henceforth orientated toward demand, with monetary exchanges taking a larger share.By the beginning of the 14th century, the Macedonian countryside was made up of an almost unbroken network of estates that had replaced the former network of communes. Villages that are known to have possessed commune status in the 10th century became estates of thefisc,after which they might be ceded to a monastery or lay person.

The population was dense in the 6th century, but it diminished in the 7th and 8th centuries. Epidemics (such as theplagueof 541/542 and its recurrences until 747) seem to have had greater effects on population volume than wars. From the 9th century on, the population of the empire increased, but it was unevenly distributed.A growing population would imply an increase in the area under cultivation. The automatic effect of a larger population was also amplified by the demand from a growing number of people who did not produce much or at all. Indeed, it is estimated that areas under cultivation must have almost doubled, and that the extension of crops might have affected a shift in the location of grazing lands, and pushed back the woodlands.

The 12th century saw the development oftillingandmillingtechnologies in the West, but there is less evidence for similar Byzantine innovation. Western advances like thewindmillwere adopted by the Byzantines, but, unlike the West,Arabic numeralswere not yet implemented for double-entry book-keeping. There are illustrations of agricultural implements fromilluminatedmedieval manuscripts ofHesiod'sWorks and Daysincluding thewheel,mortar,pestle,malletand some parts forcartsandsoleard plough,but, even centuries later, neither the plough nor wheeled cart were widely in use, possibly because of the nature of thePonticterrain.

The conquest of the empire by the Crusaders in 1204, and the subsequent division of the Byzantine territories affected the agrarian economy as it did other aspects of economic organization, and economic life. These territories split among small Greek and Latin states, lost much of the cohesion they may have had: the Byzantine state could not function as a unifying force, and, in the 13th century, there was very little to replace it.The 13th century is the last period, during which one may speak of significant land clearance, that is, the act of bringing previously uncultivated land into cultivation. But the progressive impoverishment of the peasantry, entailed the decline of a certainaggregate demand,and resulted in a concentration of resources in the hands of large landowners, who must have had considerable surpluses.

The demographic expansion came to an end in the course of the 14th century, during which a deterioration of the status ofparoikoi,an erosion of the economic function of village by the role of the large estates, and a precipitous demographic decline inMacedoniais established by modern research.The upper levels of the aristocracy lost their fortunes, and eventually there was a concentration of property on the hands of the larger, and more privileged monasteries, at least in Macedonia. The monasteries did not show great versatility or innovative spirit, and the rural economy had to wait, for its recovery, until the effects of epidemics had been reversed, security had been established, and communications restored: that is, until the firm establishment of theOttomansin the Balkans.

Economic and fiscal history

The Eastern Roman economy suffered less from the Barbarian raids that plagued theWestern Roman Empire.UnderDiocletian's reign, theEastern Roman Empire's annual revenue was at 9,400,000solidi,out of a total of 18,000,000solidifor the entire Roman Empire.These estimates can be compared to the AD 150 annual revenue of 14,500,000solidiand the AD 215 of 22,000,000solidi.By the end ofMarcian's reign, the annual revenue for the Eastern empire was 7,800,000solidi,thus allowing him to amass about 100,000pounds/45tonnesof gold or 7,200,000solidifor the imperial treasury.Warren Treadgold estimates that during the period from Diocletian to Marcian, the Eastern Empire's population and agriculture declined a bit, but not much. Actually, the few preserved figures show that the largest eastern cities grew somewhat between the 3rd and 5th centuries.By Marcian's reign the Eastern Empire's difficulties seem to have been easing, and the population had probably begun growing for the first time in centuries.

The wealth of Constantinople can be seen by howJustin Iused 3,700 pounds/1.66 tonnes of gold just for celebrating his own consulship. By the end of his reign,Anastasius Ihad managed to collect for the treasury an amount of 23,000,000solidior 320,000 pounds/144 tonnes of gold. At the start ofJustinian I's reign, the Emperor had inherited a surplus 28,800,000 from Anastasius I and Justin I.Before Justinian I's reconquests the state had an annual revenue of 5,000,000solidi,which further increased after his reconquests in 550.Nevertheless, Justinian I had little money left towards the end of his reign partly because of theJustinian Plague,and theRoman–Persian Wars(Justinian spent large amounts of money in annual subsidies to theSassanian Empire), as well as his wars of reconquest in Italy and North Africa, all of which greatly strained the royal treasury. In addition to these expenses, the rebuilding ofHagia Sophiacost 20,000 pounds/9 tonnes of gold.Subsidies to enemy states were also paid by Justinian's successors:Justin IIwas forced to pay 80,000 silver coins to theAvarsfor peace; his wife Sophia paid 45,000soliditoKhosrau Iin return for a year's truce,and thenTiberius II Constantinegave away 7,200 pounds of gold each year for four years. The East Roman Empire's aristocratic language ofLatinbegan to erode and give way to the native language ofGreekstarting during theRoman-Persian Great War of 602-628,thesolidus(plural:solidi) would begin to also be known by its Greek name, thenomisma(plural:nomismata).

TheByzantine-Arab Warsreduced the territory of the Empire to a third in the 7th century and the economy slumped; in 780 the Byzantine Empire's revenues were reduced to only 1,800,000nomismata.From the 8th century onward the Empire's economy improved dramatically. This was a blessing for Byzantium in more than one way; the economy, the administration of gold coinage and the farming of theAnatolianpeninsula served to meet the military's constant demands. Since Byzantium was in a constant state of warfare with her neighbours (even if only by raiding) the military required weapons to be manufactured by the bigger cities (such asThessaloniki) whilst the smaller towns were subject to grain, wine and even biscuit requisitions by Imperial officers. Even though the soldiers' pay was minimal, large armies were a considerable strain on Byzantium. As gold coins were spent on soldiers to serve in the army, these would in time spend their money acquiring their own goods and much revenue would return to the state in the form of taxation. As a result, the Byzantine economy was self-sufficient, allowing it to thrive in theDark Ages.The success of the Byzantine army was in no small part due to the success of her economy.

Around 775, thelandandhead taxesyielded an estimated 1,600,000nomismata/7.2 tonnes of gold annually for the empire. Commerce during this period slumped, therefore only contributing 200,000nomismataannually. The expenditures of the period were quite large when compared to the annual revenues. Approximately 600,000nomismatawent to the payroll of the army annually while other military costs took another 600,000nomismataannually. Supporting theByzantine bureaucracyneeded 400,000nomismata.Also, imperial largess cost the treasury 100,000nomismataevery year. All of these expenses meant that the Byzantine government had only about 100,000nomismatain surplus revenue each year for treaties, bribes, or gifts.

Expenses again soared, when a massiveMuslimarmy invaded the empire in 806, forcingNikephoros Ito pay a ransom of 50,000 gold coins and a yearly tribute of 30,000 gold coins.In order to impress theCaliph of Baghdad,Theophilosdistributed 36,000 gold coins to the citizens of Baghdad, and in 838, he was forced to pay 100,000 golddinarsto the Caliph. The Byzantine economic recovery in the early 9th century can be seen by the fact that Emperor Theophilos was able to leave 7,000,000nomismata/31.5 tonnes of gold in the imperial treasury for his successor in 842.After Theophilos' death his wifeTheodora IIcontinued his successful policies and even increased the imperial reserves to 7,848,000nomismata.

Around 850, the land and head taxes yielded an estimated 2,900,000nomismataannually for the empire. Commerce during this period increased dramatically, therefore contributing 400,000nomismataannually. The expenditures of the period were large, but manageable by the treasury. Approximately 1,400,000nomismatawent to the payroll of the army annually while other military costs took another 800,000nomismataannually. Supporting the Byzantine bureaucracy needed 500,000nomismata.Also, imperial largess cost the treasury 100,000nomismataevery year. All of these expenses meant that the Byzantine government had about 500,000nomismatain surplus revenue each year, much more than in the 8th century.

Unfortunately under their sonMichael IIIthe reserves dwindled to about 100,000nomismata.However, under Basil I's prudent economic policies, the state quickly raised 4,300,000nomismata,far more even than the empire's annual revenue of 3,300,000nomismata.

From the 10th century, however, until the end of the twelfth, theByzantine Empireprojected an image of wealth and luxury.Constantine V's reforms (c. 765) marked the beginning of a revival that continued until 1204.The travelers who visited its capital were impressed by the wealth accumulated inConstantinople;riches that also served the state's diplomatic purposes as a means of propaganda, and a way to impress foreigners as well its own citizens. WhenLiutprand of Cremonawas sent as an ambassador to the Byzantine capital in the 940s, he was overwhelmed by the imperial residence, the luxurious meals, and acrobatic entertainment.

Sviatoslav Iwas paid 15,000 pounds of gold byNikephoros IIto invadeBulgariain 968. By the time ofBasil II's death in 1025, the annual income had increased to 5,900,000nomismata,which allowed him to amass a large surplus of 14,400,000nomismata(200,000 pounds/90 tonnes of gold) in the treasury for his successor.

Nevertheless, the Byzantine economy went into a long decline until theComnenian Dynastywas able to revive the economy. In the aftermath of theBattle of Manzikert,Alp Arslan at first suggested to EmperorRomanos IVa ransom of 10,000,000 gold coins, but later reduced it to 1,500,000 gold coins with a further 360,000 gold coins annually.

In exchange for an alliance,Alexios Isent 360,000 gold coins to EmperorHenry IV.The wealth of the empire under the Comnenians can be seen by how EmperorManuel Iwas able to ransom some Latin prisoners from the Muslims for 100,000 dinars, then 150,000 dinars forBohemond IIIin 1165, 120,000 dinars forRaynald of Châtillon,and 150,000 dinars forBaldwin of Ibelinin 1180.When Manuel became emperor he ordered 2 gold coins to be given to every householder in Constantinople and 200 pounds of gold (including 200 silver coins annually) to be given to theEastern Orthodox Church.When his nieceTheodoramarried KingBaldwin IIIofJerusalemin 1157, Manuel gave her a dowry of 100,000 gold coins, 10,000 gold coins for marriage expenses, and presents (jewels and silk garments) which were worth 14,000 gold coins total.The expense of Manuel's involvement in Italy must have cost the treasury a great deal (probably more than 2,160,000hyperpyraor 30,000 pounds of gold).Then he also promised to pay 5,000 pounds of gold to thePopeand theCuria.During his reign, Manuel bought a very rich jewel (for 62,000 silvermarks) which was used during the coronation of the Latin EmperorBaldwin I.The main source of the state's wealth in the 12th century was thekommerkion,a customs duty levied at Constantinople on all imports and exports, which was stated to have collected 20,000hyperpyraeach day.This, combined with other sources of income, meant the empire's annual revenue was at 5,600,000hyperpyrain 1150.Under the Komnenian emperors, many exemptions of trade duties were given to the Italian traders, which meant the loss of about 50,000hyperpyraannually.A Venetian embassy visited Constantinople in 1184 and an agreement was reached that compensation of 1,500 pounds of gold (or 108,000hyperpyra) would be paid for the losses incurred in 1171.By the end of Manuel I's reign the amount of money used to maintain the Komnenian imperial family is said to be able to maintain an army of 100,000 men.

Theporphyrystatue ofthe Tetrarchswas plundered from Constantinople and placed on the façade ofSaint Mark's Church, Venice.

After the demise of the Komnenoi, the Byzantine economy declined under the impact of several factors: the dismemberment of the Empire after 1204, the successive territorial losses to the Turks (although the strong economic interaction of Byzantine territories with those lost by the Empire continued), and the Italian expansion in the Mediterranean and theBlack Sea.WhenIsaac II Angelosbecame Emperor in 1185, a mob broke into the palace and carried off 1,200 pounds of gold, 3,000 pounds of silver, and 20,000 pounds of bronze coins.In 1195, Holy Roman EmperorHenry VIforced Byzantine EmperorAlexios III Angelosto pay him a tribute of 1,000 pounds of gold (originally 5,000 pounds of gold) and in 1204 Alexios III took 1,000 pounds of gold (or 72,000hyperpyra) when he fled Constantinople.The presence of the crusading army not only culminated in a violent sack that dispersed and destroyed the accumulated wealth, and culture of centuries, but was accompanied by a series of fires that ravaged the northern and central sections of the city resulting in a steady exodus of the city's residents to the Greek centers of government in exile. The sack of Constantinople by Latin crusaders in 1204 was an economic catastrophe. Due to the financial crisis, the state could only pay 100,000 silver marks (65,000 pounds of pure silver) out of 200,000 silver marks (equivalent to 800,000hyperpyra) to the Crusaders in 1204.The official tally of plunder from Constantinople was about 900,000 silver marks, the equivalent of about 3,600,000hyperpyraor 50,000 pounds/22.5 tonnes of gold.The impoverishedLatin emperorsmelted down statues for coin, while theVenetiansexported their declining profits, along with choice relics and architecture spolia for their churches. In 1237, Latin EmperorBaldwin IIpawned theCrown of Thornsto a Venetian merchant for 13,134 gold coins.

By the time the Palaiologoi took power, Italian merchants had come to dominate the trade by sea whilst Turkic incursions prevented any success from trade across roads.Michael VIII Palaiologosstrove to restore the capital's greatness, but the resources of the empire were inadequate. In 1282, Michael VIII was forced to drain the treasury to pay the enormous bribe of 60,000hyperpyrato KingPeter III of Aragonto invade theKingdom of Sicily.Constantinople became once more, as in the seventh and eighth centuries, a ruralized network of scattered nuclei; in the final decades before the fall, the population numbered 70,000 people.Gradually, the state also lost its influence on the modalities of trade and the price mechanisms, and its control over the outflow of precious metals and, according to some scholars, even over the minting of coins.By 1303, the empire's annual revenue dropped to less than 1,800,000hyperpyra,underAndronikos II Palaiologos.In 1321, only with extreme effort was Andonikos II able to raise revenues to 1,000,000hyperpyra.

The Byzantine economy had declined so much that by 1343, EmpressAnna of Savoyhad to pawn the Byzantinecrown jewelsfor 30,000 Venetian ducats, which was the equivalent of 60,000hyperpyra.In 1348, Constantinople had an annual revenue of 30,000hyperpyrawhile across the Golden Horn in the Genoese colony ofGalata,the annual revenue was 200,000hyperpyra.When EmperorJohn VI Kantakouzenosattempted to rebuild the Byzantine navy, he was only able to raise an inadequate 50,000hyperpyra.The only success during this period was when theRepublic of Genoaagreed to pay a war indemnity of 100,000hyperpyrain 1349. When EmperorJohn V Palaiologoswas captured byIvan Alexanderin 1366, he was forced to pay a ransom of 180,000florins.In 1370, the empire owedVenice,25,663hyperpyra(of which only 4,500hyperpyrahad so far been paid) for damage done to Venetian property.In February 1424,Manuel II Palaiologossigned an unfavorable peace treaty with the Ottoman Turks, whereby the Byzantine Empire was forced to pay 300,000 silver coins to the Sultan on annual basis. In 1453, the economy of the Genoan quarter in Constantinople had a revenue 7 times greater than that of the whole Empire — not even a shadow of its former self.EmperorConstantine XIowed Venice 17,163hyperpyrawhen he died in 1453.

The exact amount of annual income the Byzantine government received, is a matter of considerable debate, due to the scantness and ambiguous nature of the primary sources. The following table contains approximate estimates.

Year	Annual Revenue
305	9,400,000solidi/42.3tonnesof gold
457	7,800,000solidi
518	8,500,000solidi
533	5,000,000solidi
540	11,300,000solidi/50.85 tonnes of gold
555	6,000,000solidi
565	8,500,000solidi
641	3,700,000nomismata
668	2,000,000nomismata
775	1,800,000nomismata
775	2,000,000nomismata
842	3,100,000nomismata
850	3,300,000nomismata
959	4,000,000nomismata
1025	5,900,000nomismata
1150	5,600,000hyperpyra
1303	1,800,000hyperpyra
1321	1,000,000hyperpyra

State's role

Law of the Byzantine EmperorAnastasius I(491-518) regulating passage throughDardanelles' customs.

The state retained the monopoly of issuingcoinage,and had the power to intervene in other important sectors of the economy. It exercised formal control over interest rates, and set the parameters for the activity of the guilds and corporations in Constantinople, in which the state has a special interest (e.g. the sale ofsilk) or whose members exercised a profession that was of importance for trade. The emperor and his officials intervened at times of crisis to ensure the provisioning of the capital and to keep down the price ofcereals.For this reason, the empire strictly controlled both the internal circulation of commodities, and the international trade (certainly in intent; to a considerable degree also in practice).Additionally, the state often collected part of the surplus in the form of tax, and put it back into circulation, through redistribution in the form of salaries to state officials of thearmy,or in the form of investment in public works, buildings, or works of art.

Coinage

Further information:Byzantine coinage

GoldsolidusofJustinian II(4.42 g). Struck after 692.

Coinage was the basic form of money in Byzantium, although credit existed: archival documents indicate that both banking and bankers were not as primitive as has sometimes been implied.The Byzantine Empire was capable of making a durable monetary system function for more than a thousand years, fromConstantine Ito 1453, because of its relative flexibility. Money was both product and instrument of a complex and developed financial and fiscal organization that contributed to the economic integration of its territory.

The first features of the administrative organization of monetary production were first established byDiocletianand Constantine, and were still in existence at the beginning of the 7th century.During Byzantine history, supervision of the mintsbelonged to the Emperor; thus the government controlled, to a certain degree, the money supply. Nevertheless, the Emperor and his government were not always capable of conducting a monetary policy in the modern meaning of the term.

Ever since the creation of the Byzantine monetary system by Constantine in 312, its pivot had been goldensolidus,a coinage whose nominal value was equal to its intrinsic value, as is proven by theTheodosian Code.Solidusbecame a highly priced and stable means of storing and transferring valuesNovel 16 ofValentinian IIIpunished with death anyone who dared "refuse or reduce a goldsolidusof good weight. "Weight and fineness of the coinage were joined by another element: the authenticity of the stamp, which served to guarantee the other two.Alongside this "real" -value gold coinage, and a slightly overvalued silver coinage, there was also a bronze coinage of a fiduciary nature that made up the second specific feature of the monetary system.At the end of the 10th and in the 11th centuries, money underwent a profound transformation, followed by a crisis; the denomination affected all metals at different dates, and according to different modalities.The reform ofAlexios I Komnenosput an end to this crisis by restoring a gold coinage of high fineness, thehyperpyron,and by creating a new system destined to endure for about two centuries.

Halfstavratonissued byManuel II(3.53 g). Theinscriptionreads "Manuel in Christ [our] God, faithful emperor."

In 1304 the introduction of thebasilikon,a pure silver coinage modeled on theVenetian ducatmarked the abandonment ofKomnenianstructures under the influence of western models. The system that began in 1367 was constructed around thestavraton,a heavy silver, equivalent to twice the weight of fine metal of the lasthyperpyra.By the end of the 12th century, especially from 1204 on, the political fragmentation of the empire resulted in the creation of coinages that were either "national" (e.g. inTrebizondin 1222, inBulgariain 1218, and inSerbiain 1228), colonial or feudal.Venetian coinssoon penetrated the monetary circulation in Byzantium.This situation stands in contrast with the monopoly that Byzantine currency had enjoyed until the 12th century, within its own frontiers, and through its diffusion in the lands beyond — a measure of its political and economic influence.

Trade

Further information:Byzantine silkandSmuggling of silkworm eggs into the Byzantine Empire

Map showing the majorVarangiantrade routes, and theTrade Route from the Varangians to the Greeks(in purple). Other trade routes of the 8th-11th centuries shown in orange.

One of the economic foundations of the empire was trade. Constantinople was located on important east-west and north-south trade routes.Trebizondwas an important port in the eastern trade. The exact routes varied over the years with wars and the political situation. Imports and exports were uniformly taxed at ten percent.

Grainandsilkwere two of the most important commodities for the empire. The Arab invasion ofEgyptandSyriaharmed the Byzantium's trade, and affected the provisioning of the capital with grain. As the population increased in the 9th and 10th centuries, the demand for grain also increased. There was a functioning market for grain in Constantinople, but it was not entirely self-regulating: the state could play a role in the availability of grain, and the formation of prices.

TheShroud of Charlemagne,a polychrome Byzantine silk, 9th century. Paris,Musée National du Moyen Âge.

Silk was used by the state both as a means of payment, and of diplomacy. Raw silk was bought from China and made up into fine brocades and cloth-of-gold that commanded high prices through the world. Later, silk worms were smuggled into the empire and the overland silk trade became less important. AfterJustinian Ithe manufacturing and sale of silk had become an imperial monopoly, only processed in imperial factories, and sold to authorized buyers.The raw silk merchants could buy the raw silk from outside Constantinople but did not themselves have the authority to travel outside the city to get it — possibly in order not to jeopardize the activities of the provincial merchants selling the silk.

The other commodities that were traded, in Constantinople and elsewhere, were numerous: oil, wine, salt, fish, meat, vegetables, other alimentary products, timber and wax. Ceramics, linen, and woven cloth were also items of trade. Luxury items, such as silks, perfumes and spices were also important. Trade in slaves is attested, both on behalf of the state, and, possibly, by private individuals. International trade was practiced not only in Constantinople, which was until the late 12th century an important center of the eastern luxury trade, but also in other cities that functioned as centers of inter-regional and international trade, such asThessalonikiandTrebizond.Textiles must have been by far the most important item of export; silks were certainly imported into Egypt, and they also appear in Bulgaria and the West.The empire had also trading activity through Venice (as long as the latter was part of the empire): salt, wood, iron, and slaves, as well luxury products from the East, were the products exchanged.In 992, Basil II concluded a treaty withPietro Orseolo IIby the terms thatVenice's custom duties in Constantinople would be reduced from 30nomismatato 17nomismatain return for the Venetians agreeing to transport Byzantine troops toSouthern Italyin times of war.During the 11th and 12th centuries Italian trade in the empire took place under privileged conditions, incorporated in treaties and privileges that were granted toAmalfi,Venice,Genoa,andPisa.

The Fourth Crusade and the Venetian domination of trade in the area created new conditions. In 1261, the Genoese were given generous customs privileges, and six years later the Venetians regained their original quarter in Constantinople.The two northern Italian trading powers created the conditions that allowed them to reach any point in Byzantium, and to put the entire economic region in the service of their commercial interests.

ThePalaiologoitried to revive the economy, and re-establish traditional forms of political supervision, and guidance of the economy. It was, however, apparent that the late Byzantine state was unable to gain full control of either the foreign or domestic economic forces. Gradually, the state lost its influence on the modalities of trade and the price mechanisms, and its control over the outflow of precious metals and, according to some scholars, even over the minting of coins. Late Byzantine officials supposed to implement a regulatory policy used the state prerogatives placed into their hands to pursue their private businesses. Private commercial activity was also affected by the crises in foreign policy, and the internal erosion of Byzantium.

GDP

The ByzantineGDP per capitahas been estimated by theWorld BankeconomistBranko Milanovicto range from $680 to $770 in1990 International Dollarsat its peak around 1000 (reign ofBasil II).This corresponds to a range of $1586 to $1796 in today's dollars. The Byzantine population size at the time is estimated to have been between 12 and 18 million.This would yield a totalGDPsomewhere between $19 and $32 billion in today's terms.

See also

• Roman economy

References

• Esler, Philip Francis (2000). "Constantine and the Empire".The Early Christian World.Routledge.ISBN0-415-33312-1.
• Grierson, Philip (1999).Byzantine Coinage(PDF).Dumbarton Oaks.ISBN0-88402-274-9.Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2007-09-27.Retrieved2008-07-18.
• Harl, Kenneth W."Currency in the Isaurian, Amorian and Macedonian Ages (717-1092)".Early Medieval and Byzantine Civilization: Constantine to Crusades.Tulane University. Archived fromthe originalon 2008-02-22.Retrieved2008-03-19.
• Harl, Kenneth W."Finances under Justinian".Early Medieval and Byzantine Civilization: Constantine to Crusades.Tulane University. Archived fromthe originalon 2008-03-09.Retrieved2008-03-19.
• Harris, Jonathan (2003).Byzantium and the Crusades.Hambledon and London.ISBN1-85285-298-4.
• Heather, Peter (2007).The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians.Oxford University Press.ISBN978-0-19-532541-6.
• Jakoby, David (2006). "The Economy of Late Byzantium - Some Considerations". In Elizabeth Jeffreys and F. K. Haarer (ed.).Proceedings of the 21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies.Ashgate Publishing Ltd.ISBN0-7546-5740-X.
• Laiou, Angeliki E.(2007)."Exchange and Trade, Seventh-Twelfth Centuries".In Angeliki E. Laiou (ed.).The Economic History of Byzantium (Volume 2).Dumbarton Oaks. Archived fromthe originalon 2012-11-08.Retrieved2012-12-11.
• Laiou, Angeliki E. (2007)."The Agrarian Economy, Thirteenth-Fifteenth Centuries".In Angeliki E. Laiou (ed.).The Economic History of Byzantium (Volume 1).Dumbarton Oaks. Archived fromthe originalon 2012-11-08.Retrieved2012-12-11.
• Laiou, Angeliki E. (2007)."Writing the Economic History of Byzantium".In Angeliki E. Laiou (ed.).The Economic History of Byzantium (Volume 1).Dumbarton Oaks. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2012-11-08.Retrieved2012-12-11.
• Lefort, Jacques (2007)."The Rural Economy, Seventh-Twelfth Centuries".In Angeliki E. Laiou (ed.).The Economic History of Byzantium (Volume 1).Dumbarton Oaks. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2012-11-08.Retrieved2012-12-11.
• Magdalino, Paul(2007)."Medieval Constantinople: Built Environment and Urban Development".In Angeliki E. Laiou (ed.).The Economic History of Byzantium (Volume 2).Dumbarton Oaks. Archived fromthe originalon 2012-11-08.Retrieved2012-12-11.
• Matschke, Klaus-Peter (2007)."Commerce, Trade, Markets, and Money: Thirteenth-Fifteenth Centuries".In Angeliki E. Laiou (ed.).The Economic History of Byzantium (Volume 2).Dumbarton Oaks. Archived fromthe originalon 2012-11-08.Retrieved2012-12-11.
• Milanovic, Branko(2006): "An Estimate of Average Income and Inequality in Byzantium around Year 1000",Review of Income and Wealth,Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 449–470
• Morrisson, Cécile (2007)."Byzantine Money: Its Production and Circulation".In Angeliki E. Laiou (ed.).The Economic History of Byzantium (Volume 3).Dumbarton Oaks. Archived fromthe originalon 2012-11-08.Retrieved2012-12-11.
• Neumann, Iver. B. (August 2006)."Sublime Diplomacy: Byzantine, Early Modern, Contemporary"(PDF).Millennium: Journal of International Studies.34(3): 865–888.doi:10.1177/03058298060340030201.ISSN1569-2981.S2CID144773343.Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2007-06-14.Retrieved2007-05-21.
• Nicolle, David (2000).Constantinople 1453: The End of Byzantium.Osprey Publishing.ISBN1-84176-091-9.
• Norwich, John Julius (1989).A History of Venice.Vintage.ISBN0-679-72197-5.
• Norwich, John Julius (1998).A Short History of Byzantium.Penguin.ISBN0-14-025960-0.
• Norwich, John Julius (1995).Byzantium: The Decline and Fall.Knopf.ISBN0-679-41650-1.
• Zakythinos, Dionysios (1945–1955). "The Character of the Economy". In Passas Ioannis (ed.).Encyclopedia "The Helios".Vol. VII. Athens.{{cite encyclopedia}}:CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)