BYZANTINE
9S
BYZANTINE
ecclesiastical. Even the western invasion could not
close this breach; on the contrary, while it confirmed
the influence of the popular tongue as such, it left
the social structure of the nation untouched. The
linguistic division of the Greek nation thus begun
has persisted down to the present time.
The Middle Ages never created a great centralized economic system. The lack of a highly organized apparatus of transportation for goods in large quan- tities made each district a separate economic unit. This difficulty was not overcome even by a coastline naturally favourable for navigation, since the carry- ing capacity of medieval vessels was too small to make them important factors in the problem of freight- transportation as we now apprehend it. Even less effectual were the means of conveyance employed on the roads of the empire. These roads, it is true, were a splendid legacy from the old Roman Empire, and were not yet in the dilapidated state to which they were later reduced under the Turkish domination. Even to-day, for example, there are remains of the Via Egnatia, connecting Constantinople with the Adriatic Sea through Thessalonica, and of the great military roads through Asia Minor, from Chalcedon, past Nico- media, Ancyra. and (Aesarea, to Armenia, as well as of that from Nicaa through Dorylceum and Iconium, to
Reliquary, Constant™ e the Cheat Depicted at Foot
(Preserved at St. Peter's, Rome)
Tarsus and Antioch. These roads were of supreme importance for the transportation of troops and the conveyance of dispatches; but for the interchange of goods of any bulk, they were out of the question. The inland commerce of Byzantium, like most medie- val commerce, was confined generally to such commod- ities, of not excessive weight, as could be packed into a small space, and would represent great values, both intrinsically and on account of their importation from a distance — such as gems, jewellery, rich textiles and fui aromatic pices, and drugs. But food- stuffs, such as cereals', fresh vegetables, wine, oil, dried meat, as well as dried fish and fruits, could be conveyed any distance only by water. Indeed, a grave problem presented itself in the provisioning of the capital, the population of which approached, probably, that of a great modern city. It is now Known licit Alexandria at first supplied Constanti- nople will, grain, under State supervision. After
the loss of Egypt, Thrace and the lands of Pontus Irawn upon for supplies. Of the establishment of an economic centre, however, for all parts of the empire, of a centralized system of trade routes radiating from Constantinople, there was no concep- tion. Moreover, Byzantine commerce, strange to say, shows a marked tendency to develop in a sense
opposite to this ideal. At first there was great com-
mercial activity; the Byzantines offered to India,
Persia, and Central and Eastern Asia a channel of
communication with the West. Various districts of
the empire strove to promote the export of industrial
articles, Syria and Egypt, in particular, upholding
their ancient positions as industrial sections of im-
portance, their activity expressing itself chiefly in
weaving and dyeing and the manufacture of metals
and glass. The Slavonic invasion, moreover, had
not entirely extinguished the industrial talents of
the Greeks. In the tenth and eleventh centuries,
weaving, embroidery, and the fabrication of carpets
were of considerable importance at Thebes and Patra 3 .
In the capital itself, with government aid in the form
of a monopoly, a new industrial enterprise was organ-
ized which confined itself chiefly to shipbuilding and
the manufacture of arms in the imperial arsenals,
but also took up the preparation of silk fabrics. The
Byzantines themselves, in the earlier periods, carried
these wares to the West. There they enjoyed a
commercial supremacy for which their only rivals
were the Arabs and which is most clearly evidenced
by the universal currency of the Byzantine gold
solidus. Gradually, however, a change came about:
the empire lost its maritime character and at last
became almost exclusively territorial, as appears in
the decline of the imperial navy. At the time of
the Arabian conflicts it was the navy that did the
best work; at a later period, however, it was counted
inferior to the land forces. Similarly there was a
transformation in the mental attitude and the occu-
pations of the people. The Greek merchant allowed
himself to be crowded out in his own country by his
Italian rival. The population even of an island so
well adapted for maritime pursuits as Crete seemed,
in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, veritably
afraid of the water. What wrought this change is
still an unsolved problem. Here too, possibly, the
provincial aristocracy showed its effects, through
the extension of its power over the inhabitants of the
country districts and its increasing influence on the
imperial Government.
The decline of the Byzantine Empire is strikingly exhibited in the depreciation of currency during the reigns of the Comneni. At that period the gold solidus lost its high currency value and its commercial pre-eminence. It is noteworthy that at the same time we perceive the beginnings of large finance (Geld- ivirtschaft). For at an earlier period the Byzantine Empire, like the states of Western Europe, appears to have followed the system of barter, or exchange of commodities in kind. Nevertheless, as ground- rents were already paid in money during the Com- neni period, some uncertainty remains as to whether the beginnings of finance, and of capital as a distinct power in the civilized world, should be sought in Byzantium or rather in the highly developed fiscal system of the Roman Curia and the mercantile activity of Italian seaports.
It will be seen from all this that the development of the Byzantine Empire was by no means uniform, in point either of time or of place. Why is it then that the word Byzantine conveys a definite and self- consistent idea? Was there not something which through all those centuries remained characteristic of Byzantines in contrast with the neighbouring peoples? To this it must be replied that such was certainly the case, and that the difference lay, first of all, in the more advanced civilization of Byzan- tium. Many small but significant details are recorded — as early as the sixth century Constantinople had a system of street-lighting; sports, equestrian games or polo-playing, and above all races in the circus attained a high national and political importance; Byzantine princesses married to Venetians intro- duced the use of table forks in the West. More
