Angeliki E. Laiou

The economy of ByzantineMacedonia in the Palaiologanperiod

For much of the Palaiologan period, Macedonia was the most important part of the Palaiologan state in economic terms, and thus its investigation is well worth undertaking. As we shall see, until the 1340s it was fairly well articulated, and therefore may also be studied as a model of a late medieval economy. In what follows, I shall examine the articulation of the economy of Macedonia, and also the stresses and strains on the system. The topic cannot be discussed with the same assumptions for the entire Palaiologan period. A sharp dividing line must be drawn in the middle of the fourteenth century; and it has been argued that there is yet another dividing line in the 1420s, although I believe that in the latter case the indicators are far from clear. 1 A number of conditions important for the economy, that later would disappear or undergo fundamental changes, obtained until the 1340s. There was still a state which considered it its duty to provide minimal security for its subjects, even though it was a duty it frequently could not perform. For the countryside that meant some concern for security so that agricultural activities could be pursued. Although security was adversely affected by Serbian incursions in the 1280s and 1290s, the Catalan invasions of 1307-9 and the first civil war of the 1320s, at least the intent of safeguarding it was still there, as was the effort of the emperors to protect Byzantine merchants from the provinces, including the city of Thessaloniki, against piratical or semi-piratical attacks from the merchants and seamen of the Italian city states. The geographic boundaries of the state itself were still relatively large. Communications with Constantinople by land and by sea were open, and so was the way inland along the western routes to Belgrade. The interchange between cities and countryside could still function, for the cities were not cut off from their hinterland except in times of acute hostilities, which were sporadic rather than endemic. Thus, while conditions in the first half of the century were far from ideal, we can still speak of an economy that was still functioning, with its structures still descernible, and without major disruptions. With the great civil war of the 1340s and the concomitant Serbian and Turkish incursions, all of this came to an end. During the second half of the fourteenth century the state functioned in a rudimentary way, war was virtually endemic, the countryside was devastated by enemy attacks which not only destroyed the crops but put into enemy hands the people and cattle on which production depended, 2 and

I. See J. Lefort, "Population et peuplement en Macedoine orientate, IXe-XVe siecle" Hammeset richessesdans I' empirebyzantin II VJ/le-XVesiec/e ed. V. Kravari,J. Lefort & C. Morrissofl(Paris 1991)63-82. 2 Looting was common also in the first part of the century, but at that time the Byzantines sometimes profited from it; after the middle of the century, the terms changed significantly,and it wa~mostly Byzantinelands that were looted:see A.E. Laiou, "In the

ByzantineMacedonia. Identity Image andHistory. Edited by John Burke & Roger Scott (Byza11ti11aAustralie11sia 13, Melbourne 2000). 200 Angeliki E. Loiou the cities were progressively cut off from their hinterland as land communications with Thrace and Constantinople were interrupted after 1341 for a long time. The profound demographic and economic crisis which struck the Italian city states - due partly to the great epidemic of bubonic plague - had negative effects on Byzantine trade as well. So the conditions obtaining in the first half of the fourteenth century were, to a considerable extent, reversed thereafter. The agricultural economy was, as is common in medieval states, the sector which engaged by far the greatest part of the labor force and much of the capital, and the source from which the primary surplus was derived. But agriculture alone makes for fairly simple economies, which this was not. There was also trade, and it is the articulation between the two that is of interest. Macedonia, Thrace and Thessaly were important agricultural areas. The main crop was cereals: wheat and barley were used for making bread, while other kinds of grain were also grown. A testament of a proprietor who was relatively prosperous but by no means a great landlord shows that he cultivated on his land grains that were used primarily for fodder along with those used for human consumption: vetch (p6Prt),rye (Ppi~a), millet (Kexp{v), in amounts much smaller than wheat. 1 There was polyculture, that is to say, diversified production, including that of cash crops. The peasant plots included vineyards. Indeed wine was a major cash crop, as well as being a crop for domestic consumption, both for peasants and for greater landlords, including monasteries. 2 Flax was also produced. Rice, which was a crop known to the Byzantines and cultivated in late fourteenth-century Crete, does not seem to have been grown here. Olive cultivation was not important, undoubtedly for reasons of terrain and climate, although some olive trees are mentioned in the Chalkidike. On the other hand, fruit trees are mentioned; every peasant household, generally speaking, had fig trees, mulberry trees, perhaps attesting to the production of raw silk, pear trees, walnut, almond and cherry trees. In the very fertile area around the Strymon River, peasant households owned large numbers of fruit trees. There was some cotton and legumes. Peasants also owned beehives, and in the areas around the rivers (the Strymon, for example) fishing was an important secondary agricultural occupation. Finally, there were, of course, oxen, used for agricultural labor, and sheep and goats. Some peasant households owned large flocks, indeed this is the steepest differentiating factor in measuring the wealth of peasant households. In one case, in the village of Gomatou in 1300-01, the largest flock comprised 300 animals, and four households owned 770 (65%) of the 1193 sheep in the village; the great majority of households did not own any, although it is

Medieval Balkans: Economic Pressures and Conflicts in the Fourteenth Century" ByzantineStudies in Honorof MiltonV. Anastosed. SperosViyonis Jr. (Malibu1985) 148ff. I. This is the testamentofTheodosios Skaranosin Xerop. no. 9; it has been studied by J. Lefort,"Une exploitationde taille moyenneau XIIIe siecleen Chalcidique"Aphieroma SvoronosI '362-72. 2 On all of this see Laiou, Peasant Society 26ff, and P. Schreiner,"Die Produktender byzantinischenLandwirtschaft nach dem Quellendes 13.-15. Jahrhunderts"BHR 10 ( 1982)88-95.