The Byzantine Economy in the Mediterranean Trade System; Thirteenth-Fifteenth Centuries Author(s): Angeliki E.

Laiou-Thomadakis Source: Dumbarton Oaks Papers, Vol. 34/35 (1980/1981), pp. 177-222 Published by: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1291451 . Accessed: 02/09/2011 17:05
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Dumbarton Oaks Papers.

http://www.jstor.org

THE BYZANTINE ECONOMY IN THE MEDITERRANEAN TRADE SYSTEM; THIRTEENTH-FIFTEENTH CENTURIES*

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

zantine Empire had been characterized the existenceof an economyof by that was moreor less active. Comparedto Western Europe,it was exchange with a a state with a great amount of visiblewealth,with a monetizedeconomy, which has been called "the dollar of the Middle Ages," and with cities currency werepresentand active, whichhad a trueeconomiclife.In thissociety,merchants have becomeonlydimlyvisiblein the uninterested sources; surviving althoughthey state. Even in the Comnetheiractivitieswere closelydirectedby a protectionist in nian period,at a timewhen Italian merchants began to acquire trade privileges the Byzantinelands, the exchangeeconomyof the Empire flourished; Constantito and othercitiescontinued function major trading as centers; nople,Thessalonica, have even profited from the increasedeconomic and the Byzantinemerchant may the great economic and Constantinople, activityin the Eastern Mediterranean.' as of politicalcenterof the Empire,was still veryimpressive the participants the theirshipsin late June 1203: "Or poez savoirque mult FourthCrusadesaw it from cil Costantinople qui onques mais ne 'avoient veile; que il ne pooient esgarderent mie cuidierque si richevillepeiistestreen tot le monde,cum il virent halz murs ces et ces richestours,dont ele ere close tot entora la reonde,et ces richespalais, et ces haltes yglises,dontil i avoit tant que nuls nel poist croire il ne le veist a l'oil, se et le lonc et le le de la ville, qui de totes les autresere soverains.Et sachiez que il n'i ot si hardi cui la car ne fremist; ce ne fu mie mervoille, et que onques si grants ne affaires fu emprisde tant de gentpuis que li monz fu estores."'2
* I am grateful ProfessorsR. S. Lopez and G. Pistarino,who generously to made several of the Genoese sourcesavailable to me, and to Professor Oikonomidesforkindlyhelpingme clarify N. some of my thoughts. Two importantstudies appeared after this article had been accepted for publication. M. Balard's La Romanie gdnoise (Rome-Genoa, 1978), although essential for the study of Genoese trade in the Levant, does not touch on my subject, except tangentially.N. Oikonomides'monograph, Hommesd'afaires grecset latins en Constantinople (XIIIe-XVe siecles) (Montreal, 1979), is a parallel contributionto the history of Constantinople and of Constantinopolitan trade in this period,and therefore importantfor the problems discussed in this article. 1 M. F. Hendy, "Byzantium, 1081-1204; An Economic Reappraisal," Transactions of/the Royal Historical Society,5th series,vol. 20 (1970), 31-52. 2 Geoffroi Villehardouin,La de ed. conquitede Constantinople, E. Faral, I (Paris, 1938), ch. 128, p. 130: "I can assure you that all those who had never seen Constantinoplebeforegazed very intentlyat the city,having never imaginedtherecould be so finea place in all the world. They noted the high walls and

of the ROM the beginning its existenceand untiltheFourth Crusade, By-

178

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

The resultsof that enterprise, fallof Constantinople partsof the Empire the and to Westernersin 1204, created novel political and economic conditionsin the conditions whichwereonlypartlyalteredby the Byzantine Eastern Mediterranean, ofConstantinople 1261. As faras the ByzantineEmpirewas concerned, in recapture of with the fallof the Citymeantthe beginning a new phase in Byzantinerelations but they WesternEurope. Until then,these relationshad been increasingly close, and diplomatic, and frequently underbe said to have been primarily political may at the initiativeof the Byzantines. After1204, and until the end of the taken existencein 1453, diplomacyformed only one, and Byzantinestate's independent area in Byzantine relationswith WesternEurope. the most important, that not on is More significant the presenceof Westerners soil which was or had recently Before 1204, this presencehad been sporadic and more or less been Byzantine. controlled the Byzantinestate. After1204, therewere areas whichwere taken by laterthe Genoeseand the Catalans overby Westerners-theFrench,the Venetians, settled there-in -and which never returnedto Byzantine control.Westerners numbers. most of the islands, parts of the Morea, parts of Greece-in significant They formedpolitical entitieswith which the Byzantines had to fightor deal. RelationswithWesternpowers,both thoseon Byzantinesoil and thosein Europe, now became paramountin Byzantineforeign policy,at least untilthe middleofthe whenthe Ottomansbecame a primary fourteenth power.As fortheinternal century inI historyof the Byzantine territories, suggestthat that also was profoundly under Byzantine both within the areas fluencedby the presence of Westerners and control(such as the Venetiansand Genoesein Constantinople othercities) and of outsidethe frontiers the state. of The interaction the Byzantine state, the WesternEuropean states, and the on Westernsettlers Byzantinesoil is evidentat severallevels.At the dynasticlevel, thereis the factthat Byzantineemperors soughttheirbridesin theWest: six out of of ten emperors the last dynastymarriedWesternprincessesor commoners;and At withthemWestern theseladiesbrought retinues, ideas, and customs. the political between Byzantium and the West on relevel, therewere constantnegotiations to quests for crusades, efforts avert crusades, and discussionsof churchunion.3 in of Finally, in the formation social and economicinstitutions the Byzantine, one may discernparallel developments and Frankish-held Venetian, countryside, in and in thecase ofthearistocracy closeinterconnections the case oftheagricultural population.4
the loftytowerscirclingit, and its rich palaces and tall churches,of which therewere so many that no one would have believed it to be true if he had not seen it with his own eyes and viewed the lengthand breadth of that citywhichreignssupremeover all others.There was indeed no man so brave and daringthat his flesh did not shudderat the sight. Nor was this to be wonderedat, fornever beforehad so grand an enterprise been carriedout by any people since the creationof the world." and theLevant,1204-1571,I (Philadelphia, 3 The latestworkson the subject are K. M. Setton, The Papacy and J. Gill, Byzantiumand thePapacy, 1198-1400 (New Brunswick,1979). 1976); 4 On the "Observations on the Aristocracyin Byzantium," DOP, 25 aristocracy,see G. Ostrogorsky, of Arrested in (1971), 1-32; and A. E. Laiou, "The ByzantineAristocracy the Palaeologan Period: A Story Viator,4 (1973), 131-51. On the rural institutionsof the occupied Byzantine lands, see Development," D. Jacoby, "The Encounter of Two Societies: Western Conquerors and Byzantines in the Peloponnesus Les en afterthe Fourth Crusade," AHR, 78 (1973), 873-906; idem,La /6odalitd Gracemddidvale. "Assises de Romanie": sources,applicationet difusion (Paris, 1971); idem,"Les 6tats latins en Romanie: ph6nombnes

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

179

to on Indeed, it is clearlytoo simplistic speak of Westerninfluences Byzantium after1204. In some areas, and primarily its economiclife,the ByzantineEmpire in was very much dependenton the West. This fact is strikingly obvious afterthe 1320's. Byzantium became a hinterlandto Italian-dominatedmarkets,and its economycannot be discussed except in connectionwith the activitiesof Italian in merchants the Eastern Mediterranean. In the Palaeologan period, and most clearly until the late fourteenth century when political factors-primarilythe Ottoman conquests-began to interfere formedan economicunit heavilywith economicones, the Eastern Mediterranean withinwhichgoods circulatedaccordingto specific patterns.The area consistedof and the Black Sea Greece,the Aegean and Ionian islands, Crete,Constantinople and Asia Minor; Alexandria,Syria, Cyprus,and Cilicia also formed area, part of this unit. Economically,the Eastern Mediterranean was importantto the West both forits exportsand forits imports.Many important productswere exported to WesternEurope: grain,oil, fruit, animal products,and sugar from Cypruswere sent to Italy and were sometimes to the rest of Europe. As a food exreexported to to porter,this area was of great significance specific parts of Europe, primarily Venice.5Not only food, but men (slaves) and raw materialsfound theirway to WesternEurope: cotton,linen,silk,wax, alum,lead from wool from Crete, Cyprus, and acorns forthe tanneries.6 This area was also an importer some European of industrialproducts. The primaryimport was cloth of all kinds: Lombard and Flemish cloth,velvets,finecotton cloth. Metalwork and arms were also exported fromthe West to the Eastern Mediterraneanand even to Egypt, despite papal prohibitions. Soap was an importantVenetian export.7Venetian residentsin the coloniesof the Eastern Mediterranean seem to have imported manyof theirnecessitiesfrom mother the in the fourteenth a in country: century, merchant Cretewith ties both in Venice and in Alexandriaorderedsoap and cloth forhis familyfrom
sociaux et 6conomiques," 15th InternationalCongressof Byzantine Studies, Athens, 1976, Rapports, I; P. Topping, "Coexistence of Greeks and Latins in Frankish Morea and Venetian Crete," 15thInternational Feudal Institutions Revealedin theAssizes of as of Congress ByzantineStudies,Athens,1976; Rapports,I; idem, Romania, theLaw Code of Frankish Greece(London, 1949); J. Longnon and P. Topping, Documentssur le des dans la principautd Mordeau XIVe sidcle(Paris, 1969). de rdgime terres du 5 The best generalworkon the subject continuesto be W. Heyd, Histoiredu commerce Levantau moyen dge,I and II (Leipzig, 1923). On the grainpolicy of Italian cities,see H. C. Peyer,Zur Getreide Politik oberitalienischer Stddte 13.Jahrhundert in (Vienna, 1950). For some of these products,see F. Thiriet,Ddlibdrations des assembldes vdnitiennes concernant Romanie,I (Paris, 1966), nos. 529 (1346), 368 (1317, Cretan wine rela exportedto Flanders); II (Paris, 1971), nos. 729 (1364), 866 (1384); R. Cessi and P. Sambin, Le deliberazioni del Consiglio dei Rogati (Senato), serie "mixtorum,"I (Venice, 1960), XV, 356; R. Morozzo della Rocca, Lettere mercanti PigniolZucchiello di a (1336-1350), Fonti per la storia di Venezia (Venice, 1957), no. 1 (1336). Cf. F. Thiriet, La Romanie vdnitienne moyendge (Paris, 1975), 303-18; E. Zachariadou, "Sept trait6s au in6ditsentreVenise et les 6miratsd'Aydinet de Mentes6(1331-1407)," StudiOttomani pre-Ottomani e (Naples, 1976), 229-40; M. Abrate, "Creta--Colonia veneziana nei secoli XIII-XV," Economia e Storia, 3 (1957), 251-77. For Genoa, see J. Heers, Genesau XVe sidcle,activitd et sociaux (Paris, 1961), dconomique problames 340-44. 6 J. Heers, "I1 commercionel Mediterraneoalla fine del secolo XIV e nei primi anni del XV," AStIt, 113 (1955), 157-209; Thiriet,Ddlibdrations, no. 529 (1346); Morozzo della Rocca, op. cit.,no. 9; Cessi and I, Sambin, op. cit.,XVI, 358. 7 II Libro dei Conti di GiacomoBadoer (Costantinopoli1436-1440), ed. U. Dorini and T. Bertel6,Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estreme Oriente (Venice, 1956), 240; Thiriet,Romanie,340.

180

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

and Venice; even fora lock and keys he did not trustthe local Cretanblacksmiths orderedthese itemsfromhome.8 also played another,and better known,economic The Eastern Mediterranean of whichthe merchandise the East and Far role. This was a transitarea, through East made its way to Europe. Lesser Armenia,Syria, and Alexandriawere major afterthe late fourteenth this period,particularly outletsthroughout century;their and variedwithpoliticalcircumstances. Crete,Constantinople, Tana for importance outletsforthe easterntrade.9 Venice and Pera and CaffaforGenoa wereimportant in as In its function an import-export market,the Eastern Mediterranean this market.The term of some of the characteristics an international period exhibits does not simplydesignatean area in whichexchangetakes place on an international marketis an allocation device. It is characterizedby the level. An international of functioning a supply and demand mechanismthat resultsin a fairlyuniform have been eliminated; by the afterthe costs of transportation price formation, and therefore the existenceof widely accepted or easily convertible by currency, of acquiring as well as by the existenceof efficient existenceof banking; techniques linked It economicinformation. is, finallyand fundamentally, and disseminating be seen to exist in the Eastern to divisionof labor. Many of these factorsmay as in Mediterranean the late MiddleAges, althoughneverin such strength to result marketeconomy.'0 in a modern marketsystem,some were an Of the conditionsthat characterize international and more obviouslypresentthan others.Currency was, indeed,easily convertible, the Eastern bankers and money changersexisted in large numbersthroughout about the prevalence information Traders' manuals give detailed Mediterranean. areas and about the ratesof conversion."Currency in of some currencies particular wereso easy that it was possibleto utilizethe rate of exchangein loan transactions was transactionsin order to conceal usurious interestrates. Marketinformation weresufficiently and the traders readilyavailable, at least to the Italian merchants, of well trainedto take advantage ofit. Therewerenetworks Venetian and Genoese businessties, who worked bound by family and later Florentine merchants, and/or otherBlack Sea Tana, Caffa, Alexandria, in citiesall over the East: Constantinople, of informed the availabilityof country They kept the mother ports,and in Crete.12
Rocca, op. cit.,nos. 15-16. 9 Heers, "Commercio," passim; Heyd, op. cit., passim; Morozzo della Rocca, op. cit., especially no. 2. Ibn Battuta, visitingMali, found that the "Sultan" wore, on festiveoccasions, a European fabric "called mutanfar" (Ibn Battuta, Travels in Asia and Africa, 1325-1354, trans. and ed. H. A. R. Gibb [London, exchanged 1929], 324 [chapterXIV]). This was, presumably,after1353. Here is a partial list of commodities in Caffaor forwhich Caffawas a centerof transactions:wheat, millet,wine, fish,slaves, skins,silk of Sogdiana, incense,salt, carobs, alum, wax, linseed oil, Lombard cloth, Champagne cloth; see M. Balard, Gines et l'Outre-Mer, Les Actes de Cagla du notaireLambertodi Sambuceto1289-90 (Paris, 1973), passim. On I, au d'exportation the export trade in Italian and European cloth, cf. H. Laurent, Un grand commerce des sidcles)(Paris, 1935), La draperie Pays-Bas enFrance etdans les pays mdditdrrandens (XIIe-XVe MoyenAge. and J. Heers, "Mode, costumeset march6sdes draps de laine au MoyenAge," Annales,26 (1971), 1093-1117. and H. W. Pearson, Trade and Marketin theEarly Empires (New York, 10C. Polanyi, C. M. Arensberg, 1957); see esp. the article by W. Neale, "The Marketin Theory and History," ibid., 357ff. ed. 11The most famous manual is Francesco Balducci Pegolotti, La pratica della mercatura, A. Evans was Mass., 1936). The hyperpyron extensivelyused in Caffaand the Black Sea area, perhaps as (Cambridge, a moneyof account. 12 Thiriet,Ddlibdrations (supra, note 5), I, no. 360 (1316); Morozzo della Rocca, op. cit. (supra, note 5), passim.
8 Morozzo della

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

181

in merchandise variousparts of this trade complexso that traderscould go to one of the A or the otherarea.13 set of documents the Datini from late fourteenth-early the network showshow complete information fifteenth was, sincemerchants century whichwas not immeditheiragents,even priceinformation would collect,through usefulbut whichwould alert them to the generalmarketconditions.14 These ately whichfacilitate an are economicinstitutions through adequate manipulation profits As it of marketconditions. forthe distribution mechanism, was efficient enoughso situations. Particularmembers the tradecomplex of thatit could respondto specific took measuresto make it respondbetterto theirneeds. Thus, the Venetiancolonies in the Eastern Mediterranean had both theirproductionand theirexchangeconso trolledby Venice, as a centralclearingmechanism, that they would serve the needs of the mothercountryas well as the needs of other colonies.That can be seen,forexample,in the exportof wheat fromCretenot onlyto Modon and Coron but to the Venetian-held islandsofthe Aegean.15 one scholarhas recently it, As put in the Eastern Mediterranean the fourteenth exhibitsan amazingeconomic century unityat a timeof greatpoliticaldisunity.16 The questionof priceformation, whichis of criticalimportance, cannot,unfortufactorsnately,be givena finalanswerat this stage. It is true that noneconomic and monopoliesimposedby politicalpowers-all were such as duties,requisitions, The real question is, however,not whetherwe are dealing with a important.17 economicpriceformation, we manifestly not, but whether for are economic purely factorsplayed a significant in the formation prices. Spice prices and other role of do fluctuate withrelationto important prices politicalevents.' But thereare some indicationsthat underneath, and at "normal" times,there may be an economic mechanismforprimarycommodities. Thus, at a time of relativeabundance price of wheat and of relativelypeaceful conditions (late thirteenth century-1340's) the price of wheat in the Eastern Mediterranean exhibitsremarkablestabilityin timeand place.19 In thelate fourteenth too, century, whenthereis a spellofpolitical we have a certainuniformity pricesin the Eastern Mediterranean.20My of quiet, hereis that when politicalfactorsdo not interfere argument heavilywithexisting
F. Thiriet,Rdgestes ddlibdrations Sdnatde Veniseconcernant Romanie,I (Paris, 1958), no. 920 des du la (1936): in view of the bad situationin the Romania, the orderis given to buy and storeall available wheat. 14Heers, "Commercio" (supra, note 6), passim. 15Thiriet, Rdgestes, nos. 937 (1397), 965 (July 1399); Nicephori I, Gregorae byzantinahistoria,Bonn ed. (1830) (hereafter Gregoras),II, 686-87. On "Cretan" wheat and the possibilitythat it was reallyAsia Minor wheat exportedto Venice throughCrete,see E. A. Zachariadou, "Prix et march6sdes c6r6alesen Romanie (1343-1405)," Nuova Rivista Storica, 61 (1977), 291-306. There are, of course, cases where the sources of speak specifically Cretan wheat: Thiriet,Rdgestes, nos. 1550 (1414) and 1786 (1420). II, 1e Zachariadou, "Prix et marches," 291-92. 17 J. Day, "Prix agricoles en Medit6rran6e la fin du XIVe siecle (1382)," Annales, 16 (1961), 629-56, especially 635ftf. IsCf. Heers, "Commercio,"passim, especially 207-9. 19Zachariadou, "Prix et march6s," 292-94. Her argumentand evidence concern primarilythe stability of wheat prices in Crete in the period ca. 1300-ca. 1340. The usual price then was 16-18 hyperpyra 100 per mouzouria,which is equivalent to 84.64-95.2 hyperpyra centenarium. may be remembered It that the per Venetian-Byzantine treatyof 1277 forbadethe export of wheat to Venice when its price at Constantinople rose above 100 hyperpyra centenarium-a price so close to the one quoted above as to suggest that: per a. in normaltimes-i.e., not periods of scarcity-the price of wheat in Constantinople was somewhatbelow 100 hyperpyra and b. this was the general price of wheat in the Romania in the period per centenarium, 1280-ca. 1340. Cf. A. E. Laiou, Constantinople theLatins: The Foreign Policy ofAndronicusII (1281and 20 Mass., 1972), 16-17. 1328) (Cambridge, Day, op. cit.,637ff.
13

182

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

and theremechanismfunctions, economic conditions,a type of intrinsic-value foreprices tend to be stable. Finally, it is, perhaps,relevantto add that prices, tend to returnto a precrisislevel when influenced chance or politicalfactors, by that in when the crisisis over. Thus, in 1347, a Venetianmerchant Cretereported its the grainof the Romania had droppedfrom unusuallyhighpriceby something like seventypercentbecause peace had been made withthe Mongolsin Tana.2' As to the questionof divisionoflabor,the answeris to some extentevidentfrom this is an of of the description the economicfunction the Eastern Mediterranean; of or area whosemain exportsare food,raw materials, the reexport easternluxury Western articlesfrom are whileits primary Europe. imports manufactured products, the Italians, that it was the Westerntraders, It may also be self-evident especially thismarket;for markets, who ran and dominated theyhad theaccess to theWestern with theirships,they communications the sea lanes and therefore controlled they created and controlledthe information mechanism,and theirneeds dictated the is on transactions.Only theirinfluence price formation still very much currency an open question. of Less evidentis the effect these conditions upon the economiesand societiesof Several questions may be posed. Did these societies the Eastern Mediterranean. in the economic situation described?Were their own economiesinparticipate or fluenced the activitiesof the Italian merchants, did theseactivitiestake place by countries a level that the fabricof the societyof the Eastern Mediterranean at such remainedintact? Did the increasein commercial activityresultin the creationor or did it spell its demise?And what, if any, native merchant class, expansionof a on werethe effects the ruraleconomiesof these areas? These questionsare of great and of more general importancefor the historyof the Eastern Mediterranean, The answersmust vary fromplace to place: the effects, interest. historiographical for forexample, were very different the ByzantineEmpire and forEgypt. As far as the ByzantineEmpireis concerned, onlysome of the questionsmay be seriously the presentstate of research. examined,given trade complexmustbe The role of the Byzantineeconomyin the Mediterranean as to was That Constantinople and continued function an important examinedfirst. is centerof the transittrade of luxurymerchandise certain.As late as the mid- or cinnamon to continued buy herepepper,ginger, Venetians late fourteenth century, and otherspices,silk,gold and silverthreads, purpledye,sugar,wool,linen,cotton, The Veneand all mannerof merchandise. wheat,wine, mastich, soap, quicksilver, and this was numbers, tians and the Genoesewere establishedherein considerable one of the main cities fromwhichthey ran theirtrade with the Black Sea area.22
For the returnof grain prices to "normal" levels aftera crisis,see Morozzo della Rocca, op. cit. (supra, x21 comes that peace has been made with the Mongols note 5), p. 73 (16 May 1347). From Cretethe information the per in Tana and that therefore wheat which in the Romania used to cost 7-8 hyperpyra modiumnow see costs 5-6. For generalprice stabilityin the Eastern Mediterranean, R. Romano, "Les prix au MoyenAge: dans le Proche Orientet dans l'Occident chr6tien,"Annales, 18 (1963), 699-703. del mercantile secolo XIV (Venice, 1967), 69. Cf. Pegolotti, op. cit. 22 Zibaldone da Canal: Manoscritto whereit is shown that in Constantinopleand Pera one could buy and sell wax, skins, (supra, note 11), 33ff., furs,soap, meat, cheese, nuts, honey, rice, oil, wine, grain, linen, cotton, alum, wool, silk, cloth, pepper, gold and silver threads, etc. Cf. also M. M. Sitikov, "Konstantinopolj i sugar, aloe, amber, coral, saffron, Venetsianskaja torgovlja v pervoij polovine XV v. po dannym knigi sietov Dlakomo Badoera," VizVrem, 30 (1969), 50-51.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

183

The Byzantinelands also functioned both an exportmarketand an import as marketfor Italian products.The Byzantine Empire was a food exporterto the West, at least until the middle of the fourteenth century.Grain was boughthere and exported,despitesome restrictions imposedby ByzantinetreatieswithVenice and Genoa. The VenetianSenate passed decreesconcerning sale price of wheat the in Macedonia,Thrace, the Black Sea, and in the Romania fromModon up bought to the Straights.The wheat of Rodosto (the best in the Romania, accordingto The hinterland Thessalonicais also singled mentioned. of Pegolotti)is specifically out as an area from whichwheatwas exported.23 Untilthe 1350's at least,Thessalonica had an activegraintradewithVenice; shipsfrom carriedclothand Negroponte other merchandiseto Thessalonica and broughtback what is described as the wheat of Macedonia. In the first halfofthe fourteenth the century, cityof Dubrovnik(Ragusa) sought its wheat in the Byzantine Empire and sometimesbought large quantitiesof it. Thus, in 1302, a decreewas passed, allowingthe exportof clothto the "Romania" but ordering that one thirdof the value of the cloth should be investedin wheat. A yearlater,theGreatCouncilallowedthereexport somewheatfrom Romania of the to the King of Serbia. It may be arguedthat thisgraincame from western the part of Greece or the Peloponnesus,as it would regularlydo later in the fourteenth century.But thereis no ambiguityabout the largestsinglepurchaseof wheat in this period.In November1339, the communeof Dubrovnikfounditselfin debt to some merchants fromGenoa and fromthe Romania, forthe large sum of 20,000 for hyperpyra, wheat purchased,presumablyduringthe summer.That this was an unusuallylarge purchaseis illustrated the factthat the cityfoundit difficult by to repay the debt. The originsof this grain are stated clearly: it came fromConstantinopleand Thessalonica and was presumablygrown in Thrace or on the Byzantine Black Sea coasts, and in Macedonia. This large purchasewas also the last one involving Thracianor Macedonian wheat.In 1347,the commune instructed merchants look forwheat first Clarenza and thenin Smyrna,Constantinople, to in and the Black Sea.24 Turkey,Negroponte, The importance Byzantineand, ofcourse,Black Sea grainis further of illustrated thefactthatgrainand itsavailability, and conditions sale are the subject of by price, of some of the most importanteconomicclauses in Venetian-Byzantine treaties between1268 and themid-fourteenth The Genoese,too,tradedin Byzantine century. morefavorablethan thosewhichobtainedforthe Venetians.25 wheat,in conditions Of course,the Byzantine Empire is not to be comparedas an exportmarketfor
23Thiriet,Ddlibdrations (supra, note 5), I, nos. 327 (1315), 376 (1317), 346 (1316), 351 (1316), 418 (1319), 434 (1322), 440 (1323), 447 (1325), 453 (1326), 456 (1327), 272 (1312), et al.; Thiriet,Rdgestes (supra,note 13), I, nos. 156 (1343), 347 (1359); Cessi and Sambin, op. cit.,VIII, 253 (1323); Pegolotti,op. cit.,42; F. Thiriet, " "Les V6nitiens Thessalonique dans la premieremoiti6du XIVe siecle," Byzantion,22 (1953), 323-32. 24 B. Kreki6,Dubrovnik (Raguse) et le Levant au Moyen Age (Paris, 1961), nos. 66, 72, 190, 186, 217; cf. no. 321 (1377). In 1344, thereis mentionof annual trips by Ragusan merchantsto a certain"Camblacus" to buy grain. This personnagehas been identified N. BAnescu with the Byzantine aristocratArsenios by Tzamblakon,whohad largeestatesinMacedonia ("Peut-on identifier Zamblacus des documents le ragusains?", MdlangesCharlesDiehl, I [Paris, 1930], 32-35). AlthoughKreki6 challengesthe identification, arguments his are not entirely convincing:Kreki6,op. cit.,nos. 212 and 213. 25 Laiou, Constantinople (supra, note 19), 57-76, 260-77; J. Chrysostomides, "Venetian Commercial Privilegesunder the Palaeologi," Studi Veneziani,12 (1970), 267-356.

184

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

wheat with the great granaries-the Black Sea coasts and, aftera certainpoint, areas both to Europe the Asia Minorcoast. These were the major wheat-exporting the Nevertheless, late medieval economywas strucand, often,to Constantinople. smallwheatmarkets such as the Byzantine turedin such a way that even relatively such as the late thirteenth in one had theirsignificance times of relativestability, halfof the fourteenth and first century. The importantchanges in the political situation after 1343 also altered the wheat trade. In 1343, the Tatars expelled European tradersfrom international the Black Sea and forbadethe exportofwheat; the situationdid not becomestable until 1355. In the ByzantineEmpire,the civil war betweenJohnVI Cantacuzenus for and the regency JohnV Palaeologus (1341-47) devastatedThrace and resulted The Asia Minormarketsalso wereclosed of in a tremendous disruption production. in fora whilebetween1344 and 1353.26Near the end of the century, 1390 and the Timurlane'sinvasionsof the Black Sea area and the conquest of years thereafter, of onceagaincreatedshortages wheat.Pricesrose,and the Asia Minor theOttomans by of crisisforceda reorientation the wheat trade. Both Venice and Genoa turnedto Withinthe Black Sea area itselftherewere Italy, Sicily, and Spain forwheat.27 half of the and through first Since the late thirteenth century, changes. important Caffahad been a major centerof wheat purchase and export. In the fourteenth, with the Tatars, the products at a timewhentherewerepoliticaltroubles 1343-44, and alum.28 wereprimarily whichchangedhandsin Caffa preciousgems,slaves,skins, Black Sea centerof the wheat tradeforGenoa was no longerCaffa By 1360-61,the but ratherthe Danube Delta, especiallyChilia, wherewheat was the single most Chiliaand Licostomocontinued commodity exportedto Pera; grainfrom important in even to Caffa the 1380's. Both Pera and to findits way to Genoa and, sometimes, fromLicostomo and Maocastroin the early fifteenth Caffahad to be provisioned century.29 The importanceof Byzantine grain as an export commodityalso changed at became increasingly as the thistime.After mid-fourteenth century, the countryside of Ottoman and Serbian raids and conquests,areas which more insecurebecause for became importers longeror shorter had been wheat exporters periodsof time. to feed itselfin 1350, when it was besieged by Stephen Thessalonicawas unable Dugan, and Venice was asked to supply it. Venice was obliged to take over the the of provisioning Thessalonicathroughout yearsin whichthe citywas in Venetian
28 loannis Cantacuzeni eximperatorishistoriarumlibri IV, Bonn ed., I-III (1828-1832) (hereafter Cantacuzenus), I, 137; II, 476; Gregoras (supra, note 15), II, 748; A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, "2itija S. Fakultetimperatorskago Peterburshago dvuh vselenskihpatriarhovXIV v.," Zapiski istoriko-filologi6eskago 76 universiteta, (1905), 124-26; Zachariadou, "Prix et march6s" (supra, note 15), 295-97. 27 Heers, "Commercio" (supra, note 6), passim. 28 Balard, Genes (supra, note 9), passim; G. Balbi and S. Raiteri, Notai genovesi Oltremare: Attirogati in a Cafla e a Licostomo (sec. XIV) (Bordighera,1973), 20. Inter29 M. Balard, "Les g6nois dans 1'ouest de la Mer Noire au XIVe siecle," Actes du XIVe Congrhs II national d'AtudesByzantines, (Bucharest, 1975), 21-32; Balbi and Raiteri, op. cit., 193 and passim; G. Pistarino,Attirogatia Chilia da Antoniodi Ponz6 (1360-1361) (Bordighera,1971),passim; S. Papacostea, "De Vicina a Kilia. Byzantinset G6nois aux bouches du Danube au XIVe sibcle," RESEE, 16 (1978), 65-80; 229-38. For numismaticevidence for O. Iliescu, "A la recherchede Kilia byzantine," RESEE, 16 (1978), trade in agriculturalproducts between the Black Sea area and Constantinoplein the 14th century,see d'AndronicII et d'AndronicIII et leur circulationen Bulgarie," ByzantinoT. Gerassimov,"Les hyperpbres 1 (1962), 213-36. bulgarica,

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

185

Venetianproposalsto the Ottomansforpeace in 1426 included hands (1423-30).3o access to the hinterland a clause whichwould have guaranteedthe merchants of so that the grainof Macedonia could once moreflowto Thessalonica-presumably the city.31 Greeceand the Moreacontinued exportwheat,although small to in Onlywestern the and in the first halfof the fifteenth. century quantities,throughout fourteenth It went to Dubrovnik,where the grain mightappear in the sources as grain of to "Romania," or merchants mightbe instructed purchasegrainin Turkeyor in of Romania.32 But whenever origins thegrainor theportsofloadingare specified, the Arta, Patras, Clarenza, or Coron. The Ragusan sources they are most frequently show almost yearlypurchasesof wheat and milletin the Romania, particularly in the regionof Arta after1420. It is to be assumed that this grainrepresented not of the limitedproduction Epirus but also that ofmorefertile areas, Thessaly merely or even Macedonia.33 As forthe Morea,thereare documents showingpurchasesof wheat or its export Modon and Coron,as well as mention negotiations from of betweenDubrovnikand the Despot ConstantinePalaeologus (1431), which aimed at abolishingcustoms duties forRagusan merchants dealingin grain.34 was one of the most important to Wheat, then, Byzantineexportcommodities the West. There were otherexportsas well. Legumes are mentioned, particularly fromThessalonica. Cotton and linen were exported fromThessalonica and the at Peloponnesusin the fifteenth century, a timewhenthe internalproblemsof the Ottomanshad somewhatslowed down theirconquest of the Balkans. Wax, too, was exportedto Dubrovnik fromArta.35And there are in the accounts of both Genoese and Venetianmerchants commodities unspecified of origin(oil, wine,furs, the etc.), some ofwhichno doubt came fromByzantineterritories. Certainly, merchants of both cities traveledthrough the ByzantineEmpire both by sea and by land (as in the route to Adrianople)and were freeto buy and sell most products. The Byzantine importmarket was also quite active, although once again its importancevaried with political factors.The Italians sold to the Byzantinesall sortsof merchandise, both the grainof the Black Sea when conditions were right and wines,soap, cloth,and a greatvarietyof products(perfumes, furs,etc.) which
30 Thiriet,Rdgestes (supra, note 13), I, no. 237 (1350); II, nos. 1914 (1423), 1923 (1424), 1957 (1424), 1964 (1424), etc.; Thiriet,Ddlibdrations (supra, note 5), II, no. 1276 (1424). al Thiriet,Rdgestes, no. 2018 (1426). Venice,however, II, was occasionallyable to buy wheat fromAgathopolis on the Black Sea coast in the 15th century:Badoer (supra, note 7), 108. On the Constantinopolitan trade of the first half of the 15thcentury, M. M. Sitikov,"Torgovlja prodovolstviem Konstantinopolei cf. v v i ego okrestnosti pervoj polovine XV v.," Antibnajadrevnost srednieveka, 8 (1972), 120-27. 32 Kreki6,op. cit. (supra, note 24), nos. 431, 432, 433 (20-28 Sept. 1392), 435 (1 Oct. 1392), 440 (10 March 1393), 666, 668, 670-72 (Sept. 1421-Feb. 1422), 846 (25 Nov. 1435), 1154-56 (1449), 1161 (1450), 1164-68

Kreki6, op. cit., Ragusa-nos. 683 (22 June 1423), 684 (5 and 14 Oct. 1423), 687 (23 Feb. 1424); Valona- no. 726 (13 June1426); Arta- no. 848 (19 Dec. 1436), 871 (1436), 873 (1436), 876 (1436), 873 (1436), 876 (1436), 902, 903 (1437), 935 (1439), 937 (1439). 3 Kreki6,op. cit.,nos. 787 (16 Feb. 1431), 870 (1436), 913 (1437), 927 (1438), 993, 1004 (1443), 1010 (1443), 1072 (1444), 967 (1441), 1149 (1449, Levadia), 1244 (1452), 1286 (1453). Cf. Thiriet, Rdgestes, no. 1697 II, (1418). 3 G. M. I Thomas, Diplomatarium Veneto-Levantinum, (Venice, 1880; repr. New York, n.d.) (hereafter Thomas, Diplomatarium),166; Thiriet,Rdgestes, nos. 1193 (1405), 1204 (1406), 1340 (1409); Kreki6,op. II, cit.,nos. 281 (1370), 762 (1428), 787 (1431), 792 (1436).

(1450),1171-72(1450),1189,1190,1194(1450),1288-89(1453). *

186

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

from Cloth,primarily theygot fromtheirtradewith the Crimea and Alexandria.36 and Lombardy,was the main Italian exportin termsof value. In 1281, Champagne as can be seen fromGenoese notarialdocuments, was one of the main itemsfor it in whichcommenda contracts weremade amongGenoesemerchants theircolonyat Pera. At this time,commenda contractsfrequently mentioned the geographicarea It is specifically in whichthe traveling stated that this cloth partnershould trade. shouldbe sold withinthe ByzantineEmpireonly. Oftenthe traveling partnertook whichseems to have been an important trade the cloth to the city of Adrianople, receivedin commenda clothto sell at Adrianople, center.Occasionallyfurriers where, French and Italian cloth was they were goingin orderto buy furs.37 presumably, from whereit in also an important century, commodity Caffain the late thirteenth item in the accountsof was taken to Tana, Trebizond,and Pera, and was a major Badoer.38For the merchantsof Dubrovnik,too, cloth formedthe major item of export, whetherthis was Italian fabric that was reexportedto the Levant or, This was usually taken to Arta (although after1420, cloth of local manufacture. its at timesthe generalterm"Romania" is used), and sometimes exportwas linked the area.39 to importsof raw materialfrom The European cloth exportedto the Levant was of varyingquality, both for spent a great deal of everydayuse and luxury cloth. The Byzantine aristocracy Gregoras complained Nicephorus moneyforItalian cloth.At the end ofhis History, ofthe declineofthe Empire; he saw it partlyin the appearanceofyoungfashionable men who appeared in churchon Sundays dressedin peculiarfashionswith Italian hats and "Persian" dresses, or the reverse.A Byzantine refugee,who had fled in Constantinople 1453 and stayed in Dubrovnik,had in his possession and gave linedwithblack Florentine as guaranteefora loan valuable pieces ofvelvet clothing, and attitudeof the Byzantinearistocracy This spendthrift cloth.40 (also mentioned decriedby Bessarion) makes a neat contrastwith the attitudeof one of the great the of century Genoese exporters Italian clothto the Levant. In the earlysixteenth of to limit the consumption expensive cloth and jewelryin order to free sought moneyforinvestment.41 The ByzantineEmpire as an importmarketseemsto have been quite significant. market in particular was so importantboth for the The Constantinopolitan transitand forthe importtrade that in 1368 the Venetian senate pressedforthe
31On the Black Sea grain,see G. I. de BrAtianu,"Etudes sur l'approvisionnement Constantinopleet le et d'histoire dconomique sociale monopole du bl6 a l'6poque byzantine et Ottomane," in Etudes byzantines 129-81; A. E. Laiou, "The Provisioningof ConstantinopleDuring the Winterof 1306-1307," (Paris, 1938), Byzantion,37 (1967), 91-113. 3' G. I. BrAtianu, Actesdes notaires gdnoisde Pdra et de Cafla de la findu 13esicle, 1281-1290 (Bucharest, 1927), nos. III (27 June 1281), IV (28 June 1281), VI (28 June 1281), VIII, XXVII, XLI (11 July 1281), LXI (23 July 1281), XLIV (16 July 1281), LXI (23 July 1281), LXII, LXIV. 38 Balard, Genes (supra,note 9), passim; cf., forexample, nos. 65, 78, 87, 338, 283, 237, 263, and 834. Cf. Balbi and Raiteri, op. cit. (supra, note 28), no. 15 (1344); Badoer (supra, note 7), passim. 39 Kreki6, op. cit., nos. 66 (1302), 306 (1373), 729 (1426), 1254-56 (1452), 1292-93 (1453), 1309 (1454), 1241 (1452), 1247-48 (1452), 1239 (1452), 1191 (1450), 1237 (1452). In 1452, the Venetians complained about this new activityof the Ragusans (the sale of Ragusan cloth to the Levant), receivingas an answer that it marketsof Serbia and Bosnia weretemporarily was a question of necessity,since the much moreprofitable closed. 40 Gregoras(supra, note 15), III, 555-56; Kreki6,op. cit.,no. 1310 (1454). The man was JohnPalaeologus. 41 Heers, "Mode" (supra, note 9), 1100-1.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

187

conclusionof a treatywithJohnV Palaeologus because therewas a vast quantity whichshouldbe sent from of merchandise Venice to Constantinople.42 variety The of exchange and financialtransactions which occurredin Constantinople even as indicatesthat moneywas still being spent on Italian late as the fifteenth century products.43 It is clear,then,that the ByzantineEmpirefunctioned an integral as part of the international trade complexin the Eastern Mediterranean. termsof the division In oflabor,its positionwas dual. Constantinople a centerofexchangetransactions was and of the transittrade,and the Byzantinehinterland was, whenpoliticalcircumstances permitted, exporter some foodand raw materialsand an importer an of of manufactured That was a subordinate to the extentthat the goods. positionsince, marketwas efficient, did not allow the Byzantinesto develop theirown manuit factures. is not insignificant the Byzantine-owned It that in shopsin Constantinople the earlyfifteenth wereprimarily bakeries, taverns, century apothecary shops,dairy Nor is it accidental that the textileindustry whichhad flourished the in shops.44 Morea until the twelfth and early thirteenth centurydeclined,forthe most part, in subsequentcenturies. The connection, indeed,was seen by some contemporaries and discussedin preciseterms.Plethonwrote,"It is a greatevil fora societywhich and produceswool, linen,silk, cotton,to be unable to fashiontheseinto garments instead to wear the clothes made in the lands beyond the Ionian sea fromwool producedin the Atlantic."45His student,CardinalBessarion,also complainedof thisparticular kindof economicretrogression: Byzantines,he said, even in the the had allowed themselves becomeimporters manufactured to of Peloponnesus, goods and had even lost the art of makingwoolencloth.46 If in termsofproduction a thereis Byzantiumwas becoming secondaryeconomy, stillanother to be posed: to whatextentand in whatform was thedomestic question influenced thelarger international in exchange economy by exchangeeconomy which the Empire participated? The problemposed here is not entirely novel, althoughthe termsof reference are. Historianshave in the past examined the effects the presenceof Italian of merchants Byzantine trade, urban life,and the merchantclass. Traditionally, on it has been arguedthat the Italians destroyed Byzantinetrade and cities,because
Rdgestes (supra, note 13), I, nos. 275 (1355), 455 (1368), 482 (1369). Cf. in/ra,p. 204. as half of the 14thcentury, Ibn Battuta, 43For the importanceof Constantinople a marketin the first see who visitedthecityin 1331-32and reveals its commercial activity.He talks of the many and great "bazaars" of the city, and of Pera whichwas reservedto "Frankish" Christians,i.e., Genoese,Venetians, "Romans," and thepeople ofFrance: "They are all men ofcommerce and theirharbouris one of the largestin the world; I saw thereabout 100 galleys and otherlarge ships, and the small ships are too many to be counted." Ibn Battuta, op. cit. (supra, note 9), 159. For Constantinoplein the fifteenth see Badoer, passim, and century, infra,pp. 203-4. 44 F. Miklosich and J. Miller, Acta et Diplomata Graeca Medii Aevi, II (Vienna, 1862), 367-68 (1400), 358-59 (1400), 355 (s.a.), 416 (s.a.), 441-42 (s.a.), 439-41 (1400), 452-54 (s.a.), 473-74 (s.a.), 474-75 (s.a.). 45Sp. Lambros, FlaXatoo6ysta Kai III (Athens,1926), 263: -rcov ydp ~SVtK V TrOTcoV ?&rSrfEXSOTTOVViO'aK&,
'

42 Thiriet,

K-ralEvaLolpivcov douin, op. cit. (supra,note 2),bOVOus 9qpsE.Sat." Le ? 250; D. A. Zakythinos, despotat grecde Morde,II (Athens,1953), 251-52. *46 Lambros, op. cit.,IV (Athens,1930), 44ff.

KaKia worTSifas, wap6irrcov lv pfcov pdrcovwo7XAA &AoyfaKal iSati0. O0 ydp rIlKp& TWOV -ro'rrov,6V 1h Xcbpa ' & T& TrEspI'v &TtlEwX6vriv ipEI, irap6v-ros & kivov,oicais 5U 3irov, 6v-rcov PaipVKfcovV,l 6rcos &v o0rrcos & p K To 'AA-rXatrrlKou To'trola Svvcb'1ea 1TrEdXyOvs KESfVCoV 4picov, 0W-rp6 7-6v 9totoT-s~vEiv, XaA FCov AEV SEoov On the silk industryof the Morea before1204,cf.Villehar'16viovEIS?SfT KOpti.OlwVoV

188

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

the native merchantcould not compete with the foreigner's greatercapital and condition.Perhaps the cleareststatementof this view may be foundin privileged carriedon by theByzantines;it passed entirely A. A. Vasiliev: "Trade was no longer into the hands of the Westernmerchants, mainlythose of the Venetiansand the 47This Genoese,but to some extent those of the Pisans, Florentinesand others." view has prevailed fora numberof reasons. First, it accords with dramaticconmade usually at timesof crisis,and witha specific statements, pointin temporary mind. Of many such statementsthe best knownis the complaintof Nicephorus had been able to controlthe Gregoraswho claimed that, since the Westerners had acquired the wealth of the inhabitantsof Byzantium Byzantine seas, "they and almost all the revenuesthat derivefromthe sea."48 The most dramaticmay who in the of well be the statement the PatriarchAthanasiusI of Constantinople, the centuryaccused the Italians, and more specifically Genoese, early fourteenth and its in a vise by controlling provisioning of daringto of holdingConstantinople Second, the mock the Byzantines,askingfortheirwomenin exchangeforgrain.49 betweenthe fate of the Byzantinestate and is due to a confusion view traditional that of particularsocial classes. The Palaeologan state was incontrovertibly poor as suggestedby the statementthat in the and its revenuesfromtrade minimal, a the mid-fourteenth century Byzantinesreceivedonly 30,000hyperpyra year from in in Pera had 200,000.50 Nevertheless, a decencustomsduties,whilethe Genoese does of tralizedstate such as thePalaeologan one, the poverty the centralauthority was rich and the societywere poor; the aristocracy of not mean that all members number in thisperiod,and it is arguablethat therewas also a considerable powerful trade. Finally,the view I have outlinedabove is of people who made moneyfrom due to a paucityof sourceswhichis onlyrecently by beingremedied the publication the These materialsilluminate already and notarialaccounts. documents ofWestern of of existingones and permita new interpretation the structure the exchange of The participation the natives in comeconomyof the Late Byzantine period. did not end; it continuedand was even more evident than in mercial enterprise previousperiods,but it was subject to ratherpreciselimitations.5a
A. A. Vasiliev, Historyofthe ByzantineEmpire (Madison, 1952), 685. Cf. also G. I. Britianu, Etudes ?itikov, "Konstantinopolj" et d'histoire dconomique sociale (Paris, 1938), 157-58. On the contrary, byzantines existenceof the Byzantine and pointed out the continuing (supra, note 22), has posed the problemcorrectly merchant.Cf. also Oikonomides,op. cit. (supra, ed. note *), passim. Worropiav Kci PtKpOI wr&aavTrv ButLav-ricav -rhvro&v 48 Gregoras (supra, note 15), II, 841: faSov vil l6vov of Cydones,who wrote that k SaA TS WpooA6VOt. ... Cf. ibid., I, 527. The opposing view xK Wrrpeo8ov Thessalonica remaineda commercialcitywhichwas full of merchantsfromall over the world and amazed PG, 109, Thessalonicae, is contemporaries, less oftenquoted in this connection:Cydones,Monodia occisorum KG I TroOs col. 641: 'Ayop&re &dcois yi~ ovvi6v-ras, y 6sEEv,TOpEIV &vcayKx&OUva... -rodCtwr o0 OwoeiXopkvr of Talbot, The Correspondence AthanasiusI, 4 Laiou, "Provisioning" (supra, note 36), 96; A.-M. Maffry PatriarchofConstantinople..., DOT, III (Washington,D.C., 1975), 244. 50 Gregoras,II, 841-42. will be used. The first designatespeople the terms"Greek" and "Byzantine" merchant 50aIn what follows, with Greek names, or people who are, in the Westernsources, qualifiedas "Grecus." The second denotes, beginsto break generallyspeaking,the Greeksubjects of the Byzantineemperor.In practice,this definition with the rapid conquest of the provincesby Serbs, Turks, and down in the second half of the 14th century, would onlyincludethe inhabitantsof Constantiothers.With time,the term"Byzantine," ifapplied strictly, and the Despotate of the Morea. In my discussion of the Byzantine merchantafterca. 1350, I have nople the merchantsof Constantinopleand the Black Sea area, and then,separately,those fromthe treated first
4

provinces.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

189

survivefrom end ofthe thirteenth the Two important sets of documents century. They are the books of notariesactive in the Genoese coloniesof Pera and Caffain 1281 and 1289-90 respectively. They providea vivid pictureof Genoesecommerce at this time. It is a brisk trade, whichencompassesthe Black Sea and Genoa, as and the merchandise well as areas much farther away. From Pera the merchants to go to Caffaand otherBlack Sea ports,to Adrianople, the ByzantineEmpirein to Genoa, Negroponte, and, more rarely,to Syria. From Caffathey sail general, that the mostlyto Pera, Tana, and Genoa: it is in theseplaces, and in Caffaitself, of contractsare fulfilled. But the merchants sail also to Constantinople, majority Thessalonica,Chios,the Romania, Alexandria,Sinope, Smyrna,Tabriz,Maocastro, and Georgia. It is a long-distance trade, forwhich large ships (navis, tarida) are used.5' The main commoditiesexchanged are grain, spices, slaves, alum, cloth, and furs. The most commonformof investment the commenda is contract,in whichone of the partners (or both) invests capital, only one travels, and the profitsare shared.Thereis a greatspreadin the size ofthe capital investedin such enterprises; the two highestinvestments of 92,800 aspres baricats(5,155.5 hyperpyra) are and of 32,280 aspres baricats(1,793 hyperpyra), while the two smallestconsistof 200 baricats(11 hyperpyra) and 147 aspres baricats(8 hyperpyra). But the total aspres for133 commenda contracts the sixteenmonths whichthe Caffa in to documentation extendsis 696,538aspresbaricats, 38,696hyperpyra,considerable or a sum ofmoney. Six contractsof societasmaris (in whichboth partnersinvest) engage a combined and involve men of great capital of 130,337 aspres baricats,or 7,241 hyperpyra, families.52 Genoesemerchant This is the mainstreamGenoese commercialactivity; a substantial trade, in whichthe great merchants highlyvisible. The Byzantineparticipation this are in is virtually two ofthe 151 documents nonexistent. from Pera mention activity Only Greeks: one is in connection witha house sale, and the otherconcerns sale of a the slave by a Byzantinebanker (Manuel) who lives in Pera.53Amongthe 903 documentsfrom Greeksmay be foundin onlythirty-one percent). thesedocuOf Caffa, (3 fiveare real-estatetransactions, seven ments,six concernnoncommercial matters, are sales ofslaves, and onlythirteen commercial are contracts.54 the most part, For the Greekmerchants mentioned involvedin tradewithin Black Sea area. In are the fourcases (nos. 48, 409, 410, 412), Greekmerchants rentships (taride) from Genoese in orderto load grain and pigs (no. 412) and carrythe merchandise Trebizond to or Kerasous on the northern coast of the Black Sea. In one case, the cargo of the rentedship is to consistof fish(no. 438). In another(no. 430), two Greektraders place theirsmall cargo of grain (100 modii) on a ship througha Genoese trader, who promisesto deliverthe merchandise them in Trebizond,while in another to
51 A Briltianu, ctes(supra,note 37), nos. CVII, CCXI, CXII. On shippingand typesofships,see E. H. Byrne, GenoeseShippingin the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries (Cambridge,Mass., 1939). 52 Balard, Genes (supra, note 9), 40-41, and nos. 329, 525, 336, 693, 779, and 830. One hyperpyron was equivalent to 18 aspres baricats. Actes,nos. CXVIII, CXLIII. 13BrAtianu, 54Noncommercialcontracts: Balard, Gdnes,nos. 55, 406-7, 514, 537, 741; real estate: ibid., nos. 109, 329, 595, 763, 853; slave sales: ibid., nos. 33, 106, 183, 223, 594, 767; commercialcontracts: ibid., nos. 48, 208, 212, 409, 410, 412, 430, 438, 459, 505, 529, 535, 875.

190

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

with a case (no. 410), the Greekwho rents the ship seems to be in partnership Genoese merchant.Three other Greek merchantsbuy a little millet in Caffato may be seen from carryto Trebizond (no. 505). The smallnessof this transaction the fact that threeGreekstogether buy 154 modii of millet,whichis the fee (in for of that had been chargedby a Genoeseshipmaster the transport 700 modii kind) of millet. that thereis not a singlecomit In termsof financialenterprise, is noteworthy menda contractinvolvingGreeks. There are two exchange contracts-these are of whichinvolvethe repayment a loan in a different contracts place and a different thusbypassingthe usurylegislation from that in whichit was contracted, currency is therate ofinterest concealedin the rate ofexchange. since ofthe CatholicChurch, It (no. 212) is interesting. involvesa Byzantinefrom Only one of thesetransactions In a Genoese1200 aspresbaricats who lent (66.7 hyperpyra). another Constantinople a is case (no. 208), a much smallersum (10 hyperpyra) involved.There is, finally, to Marvasiatussells merchandise two Genoese, case in whicha man named Michael the in whowillpay him228 hyperpyra Pera after arrivaloftheirship-a transaction similarto an currenciesand is, therefore, which involves paymentsin different the exchangecontract(no. 529). Some of these Greektraderscome from Byzantine the Black Sea trade network. seem to have penetrated Empire.Two Monemvasiots Michael Marvasiatus, sold some merchandiseto Genoese merchants,and One, anotherwas involvedin the purchaseand sale of fish.Nicholas of Constantinople was the only Greekfromthe capital. Otherscome fromthe Black Sea area: there is a merchant(Nichetas) fromTana and one (Todos) fromTrebizond. The rest have no knownplace of originand must be assumed to have been locals. Indeed who of a one of the personsis certainly local, beingthe daughter a butcherin Caffa, a from Genoese.55 valued at 1,200aspresbaricats (66.7hyperpyra) boughtmerchandise theirsmall are Althoughthese documents too fewto permitgeneralconclusions, the The Greeks,and especiallythosefrom Byzantine numberis in itselfsuggestive. involvedin the Black Sea trade-although it Empire,seem to be only minimally is possible, and indeed probable, that they do engage in small-scaleoperations whichdo not findtheirway into the Genoeserecords.Those Greekswho do appear is are involved in the grain or provisionstrade in a small way. Their enterprise in only two cases do limited: even in termsof financialcontracts, geographically activitiesof the Greeksreach Pera. The capital involvedis small. The Greeks the to are incorporated some extentin the fiscalsystemof the Black Sea trade: they But the factthat theydo not and form partnerships engagein exchangecontracts. with the Genoese merchants, formcommenda coupled with the fact partnerships indicates is thatnoneofthemowntheshipson whichtheirmerchandise transported, the to that theiractivitiesare subordinated thoseofthe Italians,who control major and transportation. of investment forms in into the Black Sea trade network In the 1340's, Byzantinetraderspenetrated was outside That this penetration ways whichcaused the Genoesesome concern.56 the be seen from factthat the Byzantinemerchant the normalstate of affairs may
55Balard, Genes,nos. 529, 438, 412, 223, 595, 875, 430, 535. 56 See infra,pp. 192-95.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

191

of is as littlevisiblein Caffa the 1340's and the 1380's as he was in thelate thirteenth The dossierofthenotaryNicol6 Beltramecontainseighty-three documents century. 30 forthe periodfrom November1343 to ca. 15 August1344. This was a particularly difficult time forthe Genoese colony,forthe Mongolshad closed Tana to both the Venetians and the Genoese and had attacked Caffa. Normal relationswere not until1350. The communewas highly restored withits defense;it hired preoccupied one hundredcrossbowmen and sent a trireme Constantinople some expense, to at The difficult to circumstances reflected thecommercial are in presumably seekhelp.57 documentsthat have survived.Forty-oneof the eighty-three documentsconcern old contracts, theirrepayment, arrangements theirrepayment; or for onlyfourteen are new contracts, and two of these are not commercial all but have to do with at the defenseof the commune.58 The commodities mentionedin both the old and the new contractsare spices, slaves, and pearls; the capital investedin the new contracts rathersmall. The largestsum is, significantly, loan of 2,062 hyperis the and 2.5 carats of gold givento the communeforthe hireof crossbowmen. The pyra smallest (no. 74) is a loan of one florin. forthe formof investment, As thereare the new contractssome straightloans (mutuo),some exchange contracts among was made in 1343-44, although (cambio),and some sales of ships. No commenda both commenda contractsand societates maris appear among the older contracts in mentioned the acts.59 The presenceof Greekand Byzantinemerchants Caffaat thistimeis minimal. in Thereare some Greekswho seem settledin the city.One, ManuelFerroof Constanin and his widow,daughter anotherConstanof tinople,had ownedproperty Caffa, stilllived therein 1344.60Othersappear to be artisansworking Caffa in tinopolitan, and probablyengaged in some minorinvestment trade.61 Of two otherGreeks in who bought a merchantship (lignumde orlo),one was certainlya citizenand inhabitant of Caffa.Only two of those in some way engaged in trade or financial transactions GreeksfromoutsideCaffa.Michaelof Negroponte(assumingthat are he is Greek,whichis not certain) made an exchangecontractto be repaid to him in Simisso, and Iano Platisseri (Platycheris)of Trebizond contracteda loan in Caffafor 50 aspres. Indeed, Greeksfromthe Empire of Trebizondseem to have traveledto the Crimeawitha greaterfrequency than the Greeksof the Byzantine used eithertheirown ships or those of the Italians. Thus, sometime Empire. They in 1344-45, a GreekmerchantfromTrebizondsailed to the northern coast of the Black Sea on a "Frankish" ship in pursuit of his profession. landed in the He Cimmerian Bosphoruswhere,forunknown reasons,the captain of the ship handed himoverto the Mongols.The man was laterexecuted,thusbecoming saint.A few a
5 Balbi and Raiteri, op. cit. (supra, note 28), nos. 35, 36, 11. The communeof Caffa had some difficulty providingforits defense,as can be seen froma ratherpathetic request forhelp to the Doge of Genoa in 1346-49: G. Petti Balbi, "Caffa e Pera a meta del Trecento," RESEE, 16 (1978), 217-28. 58 Old contracts:Balbi and Raiteri,op. cit.,nos. 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 26, 28, 32, 33, 37-40, 42-44, 47, 50, 51, 56, 57, 60, 61, 64, 65, 67, 70, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 82, 80. New contracts:ibid., nos. 5, 8, 11, 22, 23, 31, 35, 45, 62, 63, 72, 74, 78, 83. 59 Ibid., nos. 12, 15, 51, 32, 79, 19, 26. Such is the case of Giorgio,fillatore (spinner),son of Michele Tripodi di Simisso, marmarius, who owed some money in hyperpyra Pera to the ownerof a ship that made the journey to Pera: ibid., no. 43. of
61

1o Ibid., no. 61.

192

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

years earlier,a Muslimtraveler,Ibn Battuta, had hireda Greekship to take him fromSinope to Qiran (Solgat) in the Crimea.62 There is only one knownand named case of a Byzantinemerchantin Caffain a of who lost the 1340's. This was a man named Sideriotes, member the aristocracy, The virtualabsence of the Byzantineand even the some of his moneyin Caffa.62a trader may have been a structuralphenomenonof the Genoese Greek-speaking of economicactivities thatcity.In theearly1380's,forexample,although controlled at the Greekcommunity Caffawas a largeone, it seemsto have consisted primarily inhabitantsof Caffaappear in the documents; of artisans.Several Greek-speaking in integrated its economicand they are burgessesof the city and seem perfectly institutional life; but only one, a certainCalo Iane (Joannes)Zazelli, may possibly in is This structural have been a trader.63 trait,however, probablyexaggerated the in Genoesesourcesand was in any case challenged, certainly the 1340's,and perhaps which the of the difficulties earlier,by Byzantine merchantstaking advantage in Venetiansand the Genoesewereencountering the Crimea. The Byzantine merchant of Constantinopleappears rather suddenly in the sourcesin the year 1347. His appearanceis not modest.In 1347, when,at the conthe clusion of the civil war,JohnVI Cantacuzenusentered capital of a devastated Empire,he foundthat the only group of people with disposable capital were the and bankersof the city.To themhe appealed, askingformoneyforthe merchants the imperialfleet.At first,neitherthe merchantsnor, army and forrebuilding him the money,and some of They refused especially,the bankerswere interested. themtriedto get the youngEmperorJohnV to appeal to the Genoeseof Pera for Only later did theysupportCantacuzenus' help and thus to renewthe civil war.64 to create a navy. plans can only be dimlydiscerned, The activitiesof these merchants althoughfurther researchwill no doubt allow us to describethemmorespecifically. Activityat the had, it seems, increasedduringthe last years of the civil port of Constantinople war betweenJohnV Palaeologus and JohnVI Cantacuzenusand had continuedto number had a considerable of increaseafterthe conclusion that war. The merchants full in the Aegean and in the Black Sea. They had warehouses of merchandise along Their activitieswere extensive,and they were the coast outside Constantinople. of if able to providesubstantially, not wholly,forthe provisioning Constantinople with grain. For, when the Genoese burnedtheirwarehousesand seized or burned
their grain ships and other vessels (August 1348), the city sufferedfromshortages 601< yas) (o0K of sailing ships (6\KN8aS, vai5 cpop-yovs) with which they traded both

62 Ibid., nos. 62, 5, 8. On St. Johnthe Young, see P. Nasturel,"Une pr6tendueoeuvrede Gr6goire Tsamdes blak: Le martyrede Saint Jean le nouveau," Actes du premier Congr?sinternational Atudesbalkaniques 6 et sud-est europdennes, (1971), 345-51. Cf. Ibn Battuta, op. cit. (supra, note 9), 141. 62aMiklosichand Miiller,op. cit. (supra, note 44), I, 279 (October-December1348). 63G. Airaldi, Studi e documenti Genovae l'Oltremare su (Genoa, 1974); on Zazelli, see pp. 75ff.and 80-82. half of the 15th century,the Greek inhabitantsof the Genoese Black Sea colonies complained In the first about theirsubordinateposition. In the town of Cembalo, the complaintsled to a rebellionin 1433: D. Andrews,"Moscow and the Crimea in the Thirteenthto FifteenthCenturies" (paper delivered at the Twelfth Spring Symposium,Universityof Birmingham,1978, on the subject The ByzantineBlack Sea). 4 Cantacuzenus (supra, note 26), III, 33-43.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

193

The of grain and othercommodities.65 presumedmonopolyof the Genoese in the a and ofConstantinople, monopoly described vividly perhapsincorrectly provisioning in the Byzantinesources,did not exist in the late 1340's. The appearanceof the Byzantinemerchant Constantinople not a phenomof was enon which started in the late 1340's. Merchantfleetsare not built in a day, nor are financialand commercialtechniquesacquired suddenly. In fact, the second civil war had shown the existenceof a considerablemerchantelementin Conin stantinople, the coastal cities of Thrace, in Adrianople,in Thessalonica. This elementsupportedAlexiosApokaukoswho,in return, based his poweron the navy he developed by using the confiscated on (which moneysof the aristocracy), the of the coastal cities, and to some extent on the merchants.Indeed, population Cantacuzenusaccused him of planningto create a verypowerful navy and to rule over a state which,havingvirtually hinterland, no would consistof the islands (of the northernAegean), and the cities of the coast; Constantinople then would become a purely maritimeand commercialcity.65a Whereas this statementof Cantacuzenusmay be an exaggeration, nevertheless suggeststhe existenceof a it merchantclass to which such political ideas might appear relativelypowerful agreeable. The activitiesof thesemerchants wereprobablyexpandedin the 1340's because of the unsettling events whichhinderedItalian commerce the Black Sea area. in But there are some indicationswhich suggest that even in earlier years these activitieswere geographically widespreadand involved large amounts of capital. mentions passing in Thus, the Life of St. Michael,written TheodoreMetochites, by thesituation theportofAlexandriaat thetimeofthesaint'smartyrdom, in probably in the late thirteenth There were, at the time,in Alexandria,"Romans century. who had come forthe abovementioned embassy,and those who were in the city fortrade,and Italians; the cityis always fullof them,fortrade ." In 1319,the ... Byzantine governmentrequested from the Venetians reparationsfor damages suffered Byzantinemerchants, in by among them some fromConstantinople, the 1313-16. Some of the activitiesof these people may have been transacted years or for the and exporttaxes oftwo percent through in Pera, where, one thing, import the Communewere much more accommodating than the ten percent imposed by the Byzantinecustomsofficials.66 is suggested the factthat the This chargedby by
65Cantacuzenus, III, 68-70, 80-81: Cantacuzenus taxes Byzantine ships bringingwheat &AAo8aw-rfis; Gregoras(supra, note 15), II, 841-70, esp. 847-49. - cv c0'vatv EI a-ro s65a Cantacuzenus, II, 537: io S TAv Tu-rpavvi8a wcrav 36Xaccav -r&yEv Ka Trpo5 Tlv Kcd 8 &K Kc wowrrEfav ESitoa-r'v... ca&VEEV t-r' frrEfpov, Kca BVlavTriovS iV WvTrravT&rac . . On crcov ~xEaSat 6aolaaS, Sa d-rpir cpyeqSat the merchantclass of Constantinople, also see KaSa-rT'v "popEVoivovu-rcisvacrf K. P. Matschke,Fortschritt Reaktionin Byzanz im... Jahrhundert; und 14. in Konstantinopel derBiirgerkriegsperiodevon 1341 bis 1354 (Berlin, 1971). 66St. Michael's Life is published in A ctaSS, Nov., IV, 669-78. The passage is on p. 676: 'Pcoiaiot,-rcv8ti& ri-v (rwEp sipyrat, cSi' iwopfav Trapa-rvX60vcov r6XEt,i'ca(ol o T-rolrcov W1PS 5t -ra5 1ipwopias yE -r rrpEc3Eapav,late as 1349 therewere Ka Kac "i& As to } rro6' de( Byzantine merchants traveling Egypt. In that year,Manuel Ser.&... gopoulos, as JohnVI's ambassador to the Sultan,asked and receivedassurancethat the Byzantinemerchants would be well receivedand allowed to stay in safety:Cantacuzenus,III, 98. On Sergopoulos, (wrpaypa-r-rac) "An see P. Magdalino, UnpublishedPronoia Grantof the Second Half of the FourteenthCentury," ZVI, 18 (1978), 155-63. For the list of 1319, see Thomas, Diplomatarium(supra, note 35), no. 72, p. 127: the Venetians had gotten frommerchantsof Thessalonica, Constantinople, and other areas merchandisevalued at 10,000 hyperpyra.On Byzantine commercial duties and duty exemptions, see H. Antoniadis-Bibicou,

194

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

describedboth in the Italian and in a fewGreekdocumentary transactions sources show the loading and unloading of merchandiseand the payment of contracts in than in Constantinople. occurring Pera much morefrequently Only in 1348 did to John VI lower the taxes payable at the port of Constantinople two percent. This measurewas designedto increasethe revenuesof the Byzantinegovernment and also to undercutthe Genoese domination over maritime trade; it would have to Byzantinemerchants and probablyto Westerners otherthan appealed primarily the privilegedVenetians and Genoese and presumablywould have given an incentiveto such people to invest morein trade. And it was this measure,together the with the increase in Byzantine commercialactivity,that frightened Genoese stress and provokedtheminto war withJohnVI. Indeed, the Byzantinehistorians the Genoese desireboth to "preventthe Romans fromsailing" and to safeguard 7 theirlion's share of the port duties of Constantinople. Once the Genoese burned the Byzantine merchantships and warehouses,the who had been most touchedby this act of hostility, of merchants Constantinople, In asked JohnVI to respondby fighting. fact,he raised moneyin Constantinople the the Genoese. Apparently, and armed some ships withuntrainedcrewsto fight took to war was a popular one, and builders,smiths,servants,and otherworkers of the war ended with the defeatof the Byzantinesand the sea.68The first phase
the conclusion of a humiliating peace in 1349.69

a As a resultof thisByzantinedefeat,the Genoesewereable to establish customs wheretheylevied dutieson all those stationon the European side ofthe Bosphorus, who tried to sail into the Black Sea. They tried to stop both Byzantines and Venetiansfrom sailingand tradingin Tana, the Sea of Azov, and the Crimea-and is ratherimpressivethat the Byzantine merchantswere importantenough to it on warrantsuch an effort Genoa's part. The rivalryof Venice and Genoa in the Black Sea area eruptedin anotherwar in 1351. The Byzantinesbecame involved, and forthem the war ended in defeat the in May 1352. Amongthe termsof the treatythat followed conclusionof peace, two are of particularinterestto us. In one, the Emperorpromisednot to levy a the from Genoese,unlessthe same comerchium upon any Greekbuyingmerchandise between Greeks-an effort Genoa to by duty were to be levied on transactions undercutby Greektraders. avoid being The second clause forbadethe Byzantinesto sail to Tana or the Sea of Azov sailed there.This articlemusthave except at timeswhen the Genoese themselves
sur Recherches les douanesd Byzance (Paris, 1963), 97ff.On the policy,initiatedby the Comneniand followed fromcustoms the (primarily Venetiansand the Genoese) exemptions foreigners by the Palaeologi, of granting cit. (supra, note 5), I, 428ff.; Miklosich and Miiller,op. cit. (supra, duties, see, among others, Heyd, op. note 44), III, 84ff.Cf. D. J.Geanakoplos, EmperorMichael Palaeologus and the West (Cambridge,Mass., 1959), 87ff.,300-4. The port cleared by John 67Cantacuzenus (supra, note 26), III, 68ff.;Gregoras(supra,note 15), II, 841ff. VI in 1351 so that largerships could reach Constantinople may have been envisaged as servingcommercial as well as militarypurposes: G. Guilland, "Les ports de Byzance sur la Propontide," Byzantion,23 (1953), 235-38. 68Gregoras, 850-51,857; Cantacuzenus, 71-73. III, II, of 69Gregoras,II, 877; D. M. Nicol, The Last Centuries Byzantium(London, 1972), 227-34.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

195

been much debated by John Cantacuzenus,since it was stated that it was not finaland could be overruled the Doge of Genoa.70 by the In 1355, the peace treatybetweenVenice and Genoa stipulatedthat neither GenoesenortheVenetianswouldsail to Tana fora periodofthreeyears.This clause on and was was a clear effort the part of Genoa to build up her own port of Caffa, by implemented Venice. Only in 1358 did the Venetianssend ships to Tana, and a year later they complainedthat the Genoese podesta in Pera created troublefor from the ships returning Tana.7" The episodes of 1347-52 are the only known cases in which the Byzantine seem to have triedto break into at least part of the great commerce merchants of the the Black Sea. The clause of the treatyof 1352 prohibiting Byzantinesfrom have been prompted by the commercial to Tana might less activities possibly sailing the Venetian-Genoese of the Byzantinesthan by rivalryand by Genoa's fearthat the Venetiansmightuse Byzantineships or shipsundernominalByzantinecontrol Even if thisis the case, it is clear that, to tryto revivetheirBlack Sea commerce. fora time at least, Byzantinecommercial activity was considerableand that an was effort made to break its dependenceon the Genoese. After 1352 and throughthe early fifteenth century,Byzantine merchantsdo and Pera, and theiractivities appear both in the Black Sea and in Constantinople are of some interest. the Black Sea, in 1360-61, thereis a considerable In number of Greek merchants,shipmasters, and people who invest in trade. The notary Antoniodi Ponz6 producedninety-nine in Chiliaon the Danube delta between acts the end of November1360 and March1361; thirty-eight of percent thesedocuments mentionone or more Greeksas participants the various transactions. in (38 acts) At least twenty-six these acts are pure commercial of transactions:exchangeconof tracts,loans, renting ships or space on ships,and sale of merchandise.72 Even a cursoryglance at the materialshows how completely the Greekswere in the economicactivitiesof this port. Chilia was at this timeprimarily integrated an outlet for the grain trade and for trade in wax, honey, and slaves. Several people with Greek names (48 in all) appear in these documents.They hail from various areas, mostly along the Black Sea coast: Trebizond, Caffa, Kerasous, Maocastro,Vi'ina, Mesembria.There are two GreeksfromAdrianople,whichhad not yet been capturedby the Turks.73 GreeksfromPera and Constantinople are also mentioned. Like the Italians,thesepeopletransported theirmerchandise (grain,
Gregoras,III, 145, 151; P. Schreiner, Die byzantinischen Kleinchroniken (Vienna, 1975), I, chronicle8, p. 83; Liber jurium reipublicaeGenuensis,ed. H. Ricottius,Monumentahistoriaepatriae, IX (Turin,1872), no. 203; T. Belgrano, Documentiriguardantila colonia genovese Pera (Genoa, 1888), no. XVI, 124-25; di L. Sauli, Della colonia dei genovesiin Galata, II (Turin, 1831), 216-22; Heyd, op. cit. (supra, note 5), I, 503-10; II, 199-200; Nicol. op. cit.,243-44; M. Balard, "Apropos de la bataille du Bosphore," TM, 4 (1970), 431-69. 71 Heyd, op. cit.,II, 201-2. The Byzantinesdo not seem to have had a presencein Tana or the Sea of Azov, at least as far as one can see fromthe accounts of the notaryMoreto Bon: MoretoBon, notaioin Venezia, Trebisonda e Tana (1403-1408), ed. S. de' Colli (Venice, 1963). On Venetian complaints about the arbitraryactions of the Genoese, see Thomas, Diplomatarium(supra, note 35), II (Venice, 1899), no. 31 "Venise et la mer noire du XIe au (1359-60). On Venice in the Black Sea, cf. M. Nystazopoulou-Pe16kidis, XVe siecle," e-naupfopa-ra, (1970), 15-51. 7 72 G. Pistarino,Notai in Atti a genovesi Oltremare. rogati Chilia da Antoniodi Ponz6 (1360-61) (Bordighera, 1971). 78 E. A. Zachariadou, "The Conquest of Adrianopleby the Turks," Studi Veneziani,12 (1970), 211-17.
70

196

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

boats (cigute) that wereusual in the Danube especially)in the small,flat-bottomed delta. Like everyoneelse, they financedtheirenterprises the use mostlythrough of exchange contracts.Their activitieswere limited to the Black Sea area and to Pera. Like the Armeniansand the Italians mentionedin the documentation, the theseGreektradersfedGenoesecommerce through colonyat Pera. From there, some of the commoditiesreached Genoa.74This final stage of the commercial does not showin the sources,and in any case fewGreeks could however, activity, in have participated it. of The enterprises the Black Sea Greeksare characterized theirsmall size and by theirvariety.As an example one may take some GreeksfromKerasous. Five of owned 10.5 carats of one halfof a ciguta;the otherhalfwas owned themtogether Savona, who was also thecaptain. The Greekswere,presumably, by an Italian from usual amongthe sailorson thisboat and also ownedsome sharesin it, a procedure The boat was loadinggrainto be carriedto Pera. The Greeksmade two Genoese.75 of one exchangecontracts, witha Greekmerchant Chilia,to be repaidat 130 hyperpyra, and the otherwith a man fromCembalo,livingin Chilia, to be repaid at 65 Presumably,they would use this moneyto buy grain and thus repay hyperpyra. was to take place in both the capital and the (concealed) interest;the repayment was usual may be seen fromthe fact that in That this kind of transaction Pera. his March1361 two of thesemen paid to a Genoesecitizen(through representative, for fromPera) 220 hyperpyra a loan contractedin December 1360.76 a notary A similarexample is providedby the activitiesof lane (Ioannes) Coschina,a Greek Two were exchange transactions. fromChilia. He was involved in threedifferent He contractsto be repaid in Pera at a total value of 165 hyperpyra. also received of of a from Genoeseman,in prepayment a load ofwax, delivery which somemoney was promisedby May 1361. He was also ownerof a ciguta.7 which in The otherGreeksin Chilia made contracts, interesting varyingdegrees, show them to have been quite incorporatedin the economic life of the area. merchant One inhabitantof Chilia promisedto sell to a ratherwealthyArmenian some wax, for which the Greek received payment in advance, as was usual. Two inhabitantsof Chilia, of whom one was a censarius (middleman),formeda companywhich engaged in the grain trade. An artisan fromTrebizond made an exchange contractwith a Genoese fromPera, with capital and profitestimated son of a priest,loaded a modest A at 22.3 gold hyperpyra. Greek fromMesembria, on modii of Constantinople) a ship with an Italian captain amount of grain (157 which was to sail to the Bulgarian ports of Mesembria,Sozopolis, or Gatopolis
4 Balard, "Les g6nois" (supra, note 29), passim. 75Pistarino, Notai, nos. 17, 18, 21, 22, 26. Anotherboat was owned in part by a baker fromMaocastro the Goto), and partlyby a Greekfrom same city named Micheledi Rocco, who was also captain (Triandafollo with a cargo of grain,a small quantity of which (25.5 of the ship. The ship was bound forConstantinople of Constantinople:ibid.,nos. 32 and 37. The partial ownership boats by sailors modii)belongedto a man from of course, a practice long known to the Byzantines,as may be seen fromthe Rhodian Sea Law: Legis is, Rhodiae pars secunda,chap. 10, in BasilicorumlibriLX, ed. H. J. Scheltemaand N. Van der Wal (Gravenhage, 1974), VII, p. 2471, in which the shipmasterand the sailors seem to own the ship together. in 78 Pistarino,Notai, nos. 21 and 22. Note that the loan is paid in hyperpyra Chilia, whereas the usual in exchange contractwould have required payment to be made in Pera if the money had been borrowed Chilia; perhaps this is a dry exchange contract. Ibid., nos. 8, 18, and 28. "77

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

197

(Agathopolis). He seems to have financedthe purchase of this wheat by an exchangecontractwiththe same Italian. Finally,a Greekmonk ("Giossafa Tovassilico Caloiatos" or "Caloianno"), of the monastery St. Athanasia, was master of of a ship (lignumde orlo) whichsailed to Pera; in orderto get his ship ready,he borrowed some moneyfromtwo Italians (one an inhabitantof Pera), in a simple loan and an exchange transaction;in the second case, the money to be repaid in Pera consistedof 306.25 gold hyperpyra. The Greeks fromthe Byzantine Empire are represented a few men from by and Adrianople.The verypresenceof these people in Chilia Pera, Constantinople, indicates that in the Byzantine Empire there was still capital and merchants adventurousenough to findtheir way to the Danube delta. Thus, on 13 April had lent some money to a Genoese in an 1361, two Greeks fromConstantinople their representative, citizen of Pera, collectedin Chilia on a exchange contract; Another May 7 (25 days afterthe contracthad been made) 100 gold hyperpyra. lent some moneyto a Venetian shipConstantinopolitan, George "Rondachino," masterand expectedto be repaid in Pera at 186 hyperpyra 21 carats of gold. and The boat was carrying to Pera. It must be noted that all of these transacgrain tions have Pera, not Constantinople, their destination.Finally, there is a as man named Theodoro Agallo from a Constantinople, wine merchant;he brought to Chilia 20 botti Greekwine and was able to use it as guaranteeto borrowsome of froma Genoese.18 money The people with the most capital among the Greeks,and perhapsin the entire file,were two men fromAdrianople,lane Vassilikosand lane Frangopoulos.They came fromAdrianopleto Chilia to place theircapital. In all, thereare ten documents that concerncontractsmade by these two Greeks.79 They were partners, Each making all except one of theircontractstogetherand splittingthe profits. the otherhis plenipotentiary commercial in and financial matterswith appointed the power to make contracts, receiverepayment debts, to act in court,and to of so on. They placed theirmoneyin a varietyof ventures,as did many people in that period,in orderto spread the risk. Withinfifteen days (April26 to May 10) made six contracts whichtheyboth participated;Frangopoulosalso made in they one on his own. The total sum whichtheyinvestedis unknown, but the sum they to receivewhen the investment was paid off(thatis, the combinedcapexpected ital and profit)was 1,664.5 gold hyperpyra Pera, and ten sommiand twenty of of silver at the weightof Caffa.Frangopoulosalso expected to receive 150 saggi fromhis separate investment.It is clear that these two Greeks gold hyperpyra of considerable disposed capital. They invested most of their capital in exchange contracts.There is only one simple loan, to a Genoese who acted both in his own name and in that of ConstantineMamali, a Greekfrom ownerof a boat (lignum) whichwas Constantinople, to come from Pera and take a cargoof grain.Frangopoulos and Vassilikos expected loaned these men ten sommiand twentysaggi of silverto be repaid in thirty-five Pera. The moneywas to be used to finance days, or as soon as the ship came from
78Ibid., nos. 25, 3, 4, 24, 62, 63, 72, 80, 73, 88, and 94. 7 Ibid., nos. 47, 58, 48, 59, 66, 67, 83, 89, and 90.

198

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

All the rest of the capital of these two men was placed the purchase of grain.s0 in exchange contracts: the loans were made in sommiof silver,to be repaid in As since Pera in gold hyperpyra. usual, the rate of exchangewas not mentioned, As these were all shareholders it concealed the interest. forthe borrowers, and/or of ships.Given that the main itemof tradein Chiliawas grain,it is probacaptains ble that this money was used in one way or anotherto financethe purchase or were citizens of Genoa or transportof this commodity.Most of the borrowers Pera; one was a Venetian,and one (Teocari) seems to have been a Greek living in at in Pera.8' The exchangecontractswere nominally, least, to be fulfilled Peranominallybecause it was possible foranothercontractto be made later, through thus changing which the money would be repaid in Chilia in the local currency, into a dryexchangecontract. the transaction The Greeks, whether from thesedocuments. conclusions A fewinteresting emerge fromthe Black Sea area or fromthe ByzantineEmpire,seem integratedin the economiclifeof Chilia. They own ships,transport grain,and investmoney,sometimesin large quantities.But it is equally clear that the Greekswho participated or in the Black Sea trade,whetheras sailors,as traveling merchants, as investors, in carriedout theirtransactions an economycontrolled the Italians: the form by is of the contractsis Italian; the main commodity designedfor Italian markets; and the repaymentof contractsis made in the Italian, not the Byzantine part It may be objectedthat the above remarks merelydescribea situationdeformed the nature of the sources: that, indeed,it must be expected that the Genoese by notarial accounts would only include those Greeks,or those of their activities, which were incorporatedin the Italian financialand commercialsystem.While such a commentwould have undoubted validity with respect to its immediate the drawnfrom Italian sources. object,it wouldnot at all invalidatethe conclusions For the survivingByzantine documentary material, as well as the information the narrativesources,confirms generalpicturewhich emergesfrom given in the the Italian notarial accounts and whichis latent in the texts of treatiesbetween states. the ByzantineEmpire and the Italian maritime The extant Byzantine commercialdocumentsare limited in time and place. in With the exceptionof a sea loan contractedin Constantinople 1363 or 1364,83 and the first the rest are all dated to the last yearsof the fourteenth years century are connectedwith in and are concentrated Constantinople. of the fifteenth They
claims which arose out of commercial transactions and which were brought to the patriarchal court of Constantinople. By their very nature, therefore, they
1o Ibid., nos.

of

Constantinople.82

transactionwill be finalizedin Pera. 83 G. Ferraridelle Spade, "Registro Vaticano di atti bizantini di diritto privato," SBN, 4 (1935), no. 3. The interestrate allowed for sea loans in the Byzantine Empire was 12%. But in Thessalonica in the rate of 20% had becomeusual. When the citycame underVenetianoccupation, early 15thcenturyan interest the Venetiansobjected to this high rate and reduced it to 15%. But, at the request of the inhabitants,the See K. D. Mertzios, Venetian Senate agreed to recognizeall contractsmade beforethis new arrangement. a (Thessalonica, 1947), 55-56 (1425). lo-rop(as Mvrlim
MaK06oviKsj

81 Ibid., no. 66. but case (ibid.,no. 66) in whichthe ship is sailingto Constantinople, the financial S82Thereis an interesting

47 and 48.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

199

84The Byzantinetermschreokoinonia koinoniaare not used: cf.Legis Rhodiae (supra,note 75), chap. 17, or p. 2473; Ecloga, in Zepos, Jus, chap. 10, 5; cf. C. Harmenopuli, Manuale legumsive Hexabiblos (Leipzig, 1851), lib. III, tit. X, ch. 8, which provides fora koinoniain whichone of the partnerscontributes only his labor. On the presumedByzantineor Muslimoriginsof the commenda, R. S. Lopez, "The Role ofTrade in cf. the Economic Readjustment of Byzantium in the Seventh Century,"DOP, 13 (1959), 67-85; and A. L. Udovitch, "At the Origins of the Western Commenda:Islam, Israel, Byzantium?", Speculum, 37 (1962), 85Miklosichand Miiller,op. cit. (supra, note 198-207. 44), II, 474-75. 86* 87 Ibid., Ibid., II, 474-75. II, 546-50 (October 1401).

can only concerna small fractionof the merchantsand investors;nevertheless, they provide us with a glimpse-little more than that-of the tradingactivities in whichthesepeople wereinvolved. In these documents,as in the Genoese documentsfromChilia and as, later, in the accounts of Badoer, we find Greeks forming both for trade partnerships and forotheractivities.When thesepartnerships given a name,theyare called are whichseems to be a translation societasor compagnia.84 term of The syntrophiai, is to syntrophia used indiscriminately describe partnershipsmade to conduct business in the city of Constantinople the West, such partnerships would be (in in the formof a societasterrae) well as partnerships as whose object was maritime and whichin the West would be coveredby a commenda colleganza or trade, contract. In the first formedforthe purpose of buyinstance,there are syntrophiai ing or operatingshops: in one case, a syntrophia operates a bakery; one of the the shop and a horse, while the other one contributes his partnerscontributes labor and thirty In anothercase, a womanforms syntrophia a personal hyperbyra.85 with her godson to run a dairy shop. She contributes the shop, all the utensils, and whateveris necessaryforthe operation,while he contributes labor; they his will share the profits equally.86 Where tradingventuresare concerned,the capital is largerthan in the cases and the formof investment just described,the personsinvolved are important, more standard. Many of the people involved are membersof the Byzantine aristocracyand are describedas oikeioiof the Emperor.The moneyis usuallyinvested in contractsresembling the commenda, whetherthe term syntrophia used or is not. Perhaps the most interesting case is that of a man named Manuel Koresis, who broughtsuit against the oikeios of the Emperor,GeorgiosGoudelis.87 They a apparentlyhad formedat least one partnership few years before 1401. That was dissolved,and in the spring 1400 theyformed newone. Therewas a written of a contractwhichhas not survivedbut whose termsmay be reconstructed fromthe decision of the patriarchal court. The combined capital was 3,600 hyperpyra, withthe traveling 1000 hyperpyra percent) and exKoresis, partner, contributing (27 half the profit. The partnership was to last forapproximately months six pecting (to October 1400). Afterthat date, the investor,Goudelis,was to recoverhis investmentwithoutsharingin the expenses or risks involved in the transactions. So far,this is a fairlytypical bilateral commenda, with time limitation;perhaps the area in which the tradingactivitywas to take place was also specified. The is less easy to detect fromthe surviving agreement evidence. concerning liability It was agreed that, as long as the partnership lasted, both the investorand the agent (the travelingpartner)were liable for losses, but it is not stated whether the loss was to be reckonedproportionately the capital investedby each (this to

200

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

as would be the Italian way) or in the same proportion the expectedprofit (which would be the way describedin the RhodianSea Law).88Finally,it shouldbe noted withmoney as otherpartnerships well and was traveling that Koresis had formed trade investedby a numberof people-another typical featureof Mediterranean in thisperiod. both with respectto the conditions is The fate of this partnership instructive, and legal in the early 1400's and withrespectto the mentality of Black Sea trade recourse of the Byzantine traders. Koresis went to Amisos, Sinope, and other Black Sea ports in the summerof 1400 but found that he could not engage in that resultedfrom trade except in a very limitedway because of the confusion he could buy he sent to Pera in Timurlane'sinvasions. Whatever merchandise his father'sname in mid-August;but the ship was lost in a storm.Koresis himand returnedin the self remained in those parts, carried out his transactions, spring of 1401. Goudelis then took him to court,asking that Koresis absorb all since it was not writtenin the agreement the loss in the case of the shipwreck, could be sent in the absence of the agent. Goudelis also asked that merchandise in that the merchandise the warehouseat Pera be divided"accordingto the capital to contributed each one" (two thirds/one i.e., third), according Italian usage. The by one that the pafirst with the second request was granted,and it was primarily triarchalcourt was involved. It ruled that, since the originalagreementdid not to forbidthe agent to send the merchandise Constantinople sea, Koresis was by to use of his fullpower to deal with the money entrusted him as simplymaking should be shared and the best he could; therefore, loss involvedin the shipwreck had not borne only by the agent. Goudelis then asked that, since the agreement losses and lapsed in October 1400, his capital should not share in the possible expenses incurredby Koresis after that date. The court here ruled that, since Goudelis expected to share any profitsrealized afterOctober 1400, he should also share the possible losses-especially since the originalagreementwas silent But the expensesshouldbe borneby Koresisalone. Finally, on that specific point.89 since Goudelis raised the point that he could not be certain whetherwhat was Manuel Koresis and his fatherwere stored in Pera was the entiremerchandise, to bringto courtthe customsreceiptsand wereto swearto the truthof theirstateThe same penalty was to strikeany one of mentson pain of excommunication. who did not abide by the decision! the partners in Similar agreements, writtenform,were made by other Greeks fromConThe dangers attendingtrade at this time made such agreements stantinople.9?
&va8XEcErSat. storicodella commenda finoal secoloXIII (Turin,1933); also n.d.), 175; and G. Astuti,Originee svolgimento Quarterly Century," E. H. Byrne, "Commercial Contractsof the Genoese in the SyrianTrade ofthe Twelfth Journal of Economics,31 (1917), 128-70. 89A provision that would seem to supportGoudelis' point is to be foundin the Legis Rhodiae,chap. 17, ... wrrApoS6vros 6 -r f ... A&v6 p. 2473: 'E&v s-ri&oei XpVCriov &pyiptov XpEi KOVwcvfa Xpucov lt K All 'vvavcxyfioulmptwMSaTv, TrVp-p6 cagpv6v &rr6 Vpfc~p ro0 arra6 Too Xp6vou p 1 Kc COVai pI drroo-rpplc "r&.RPtOv , Ta' ai &rromXavESiv. T-ro0 obKoptov XpvcioV KK c r& plv tv -r6V Miklosichand Miller, op. cit.,II, 399-400, 511-12, 550-51, 374-75, 461. The documentdiscussed below 9 is foundon pp. 560-61. cr av 88Legis Rhodiae, chap. 17, p. 2473: 'Eav 81 Too Xp6vou v-rw vSxlKc&v ATr7pcoSlrVroS Tlrv d&ph Oavp Kerr& V o TO yEv?cSa1, KaS6TEp -rot OaVVtKas -r&pTi KTxr& 8 drC;AAEiaV KiVBUVOV Kipio "-rds l KC"ai-rS the Mediterranean World (New York, caccraV Cf. R. S. Lopez and I. W. Raymond, Medieval Trade in L[.itftasTp*

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

201

Angelos, risky.Thus, we have the case of a certainkyr Constantine particularly who was to travelto Chios withmoneyinvestedby a numberofpeople. He missed the ship he was to sail on and aftera monthfoundanotherone; but thiswas evenasked forthe restoration his capital, since of tually captured.One of the investors he had not authorizedtravel on the second ship. But the courtfoundthat he had known that Angelos was looking for anothership and, furthermore, one of that the other investors (Ioannes Sophianos) had withdrawnhis investmentwhen no Angelosfailedto board the first ship. Therefore, claim could be pressedagainst Angelos. It is, perhaps,usefulto recall that at the timethesecontracts and arrangements were made, Constantinople was being blockaded by the Ottomansin a siege that lasted foreightyears,from1394 untilAugust 1402. It was verydifficult people for to leave or enterthe city. And yet, a numberof Byzantinestraveledfortrading fromthe difficult conditions.91 Somepurposes although their venturessuffered times they traveledtowardthe Aegean: Ioannes Goudeliswent "els-rT a'&-rw p," whilekyrIoannesAngelos sailedtoChios.Others sailednorth. KyrloannesSophianos, who was an oikeiosof the Emperor,investedsome moneyon the ventureto Chios, but he himself wentnorth"EIS5T 'fs TaE'ilov.'"92 P00cafcr One of the most strikingfacts about the Byzantine merchantsand investors encountered here is that many of them belong to the highestaristocracy. Thus, Goudeliswas the son-in-law Anna Asanina Palaiologina,the Emperor's of Georgios aunt.93The lady Theodora Palaiologina entrusted300 hyperpyra merchandise in to Ioannes Goudelis,oikeiosof the Emperor.94 Ioannes Sophianos, oikeiosof the Emperor,may be the same personas, or relatedto, Caloiani Sofiano,who appears as a bankerin theaccountsofGiacomoBadoerin the 1430's. Indeed, severalof these names reappearin Badoer's accounts: Palaiologos,Argyropoulos Goudelis (Argiro), These aristocrats foundit both necessaryand profitable to (Cutela).95 apparently engage in trade, either as active participants,or as investors,or both. The geographicdistribution the commercialactivitiesof the Byzantinesin of this period is also intriguing. The sea journeysto the Black Sea coasts and the are to be expected. More tantalizingis the departureof John Sophianos Aegean "to the journeyto Russia"; the termsin whichthis is describedsuggestthat this routeto Russia was a commonone. The reference may simplybe to a sea journey to the northern coasts of the Black Sea; but it could also possiblyindicatea land route to southernRussia. Equally intriguing two indicationsof trade connecare tionsbetweenthe Byzantinesand Wallachia. A merchant named Joannes Mamalis, who died ca. 1400, had had in his possession "fursfromVlachia," whichhe had as when theyformed syntrophia.96 a promised a guaranteeto AndreasArgyropoulos
Ibid., II, 372-74, 560-61. 92Ibid., II, 511-12, 385. 91Ibid., II, 361-66. 94Ibid., II, 399-400, 511-12, 550-51. 95Badoer (supra, note 7), 108, 40, 234, 258, 120, 6, 114, 236, 246, and passim. Some names appear in Constantinoplein 1400 and in Chilia in 1361: thus, we have lane Mamalioti and "Constancius Mamali de Constantinopoligrecus" (Pistarino, Notai [supra, note 72], nos. 21, 47, 48), and Theodore and Ioannes Mamalis (Miklosich and Miiller, cit.,II, 374-75). A Mamoli appears among the "small nobles" of Thessaloop. nica in 1425: Mertzios,op. cit. (supra, note 84), 50-52. 98 Miklosichand Miller, op. cit.,II, 374-75.
91

202

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

The termsof their agreementhave not been preserved.But normallythe guarantee would be given by the travelingpartnerof such a partnership;and it is to not far-fetched suggestthat Mamalis' projectedjourneywould also be to "VlaThat the Argyropoulos chia." family,a rich and aristocraticone, had connections with Wallachia is knownfromanothersource. The satiristMazaris, writing in the early fifteenth century,mentionsa Polos Argyros(who may be identified and claims that he had returnedfromVlachia with our AndreasArgyropoulos) Vlachia was, accordingto Mazaris, a place wheremany withgreatwealth; indeed, Furtherresearchmay uncovereconomicconGreekswent to make moneyfast.97 or merchantsand the Balkan hinterland, the Danubian nectionsbetween Greek lands, and even Russia. discussed here were made excluAlthough the contracts and arrangements of sivelybetweenByzantines,thereis clear evidenceof the influence the Italians conditionsthey had created in the area. and of the economic and institutional are The contracts verysimilarto thoseusual in Italy, and even the termsyntrophia that seems to be translatedfromthe wordssocietasor compagnia.It is interesting the court case between George Goudelis and Koresis was resolved accordingto that, at least Italian, and not Byzantine,commerciallaw. It is also significant in unloaded theirmerchandise Pera, in this particularcase, Byzantinemerchants customsdues to the Genoese. not in Constantinople, paying presumably between Byzantine and Italian There were, however, importantdifferences merchants.Apart fromthe fact that, as can also be seen fromthe accounts of Badoer, the Byzantineswere involved only in retail trade and not in large-scale in framework whichtheyworked it activities, shouldbe notedthat the institutional cases were tried fromthat of the Italians. The fact that commercial was different What this meantin pracdifference. in ecclesiasticalcourtsis in itselfa significant tical terms can be seen in a case tried in March 1400. Thomas Kalokyres sued and still due to him froma syntrophia ConstantinePerdikaresfor250 hyperpyra in whichhe had givenPerdikares, foranother250 hyperpyra presumably a simple not for the firsttime, since loan. The case was broughtto a patriarchalcourt, the same courthad alreadyissued a decisiona fewmonthsearlier.In March,Perdikares claimed that the only outstandingdebt was part of the 250 hyperpyra be and the from syntrophia asked that the moneyhe had paid out as interest counted and anythingelse against capital. The court agreed that all interestpaid out, should be counted against capital, and given to Kalokyres fromthe syntrophia, Kalokyres had to be contentwith that. The court then decided, for reasons of It charity,to reduce the remainingdebt by 15 hyperpyra.98 must, of course,be
in M&Laptv "AtiSou, J. Fr. Boissonade, AnecdotaGraeca e codicibusregiis,III (Paris, 1831), 97 cf. 156-57; 145, 'Erriig(a cf. M. Treu, "Mazaris und Holobolos," BZ, 1 (1892), 88-89. On Andreas Argyropoulos, had I Lexikonder Palaiologenzeit, (Vienna, 1976), no. 1255. People named Argyropouloi Prosopographisches in a large truck garden outside Thessalonica in the early 15th century; they made improvements it and des way: F. D6lger, Aus den Schatzkammern Heiligen Berges(Munich,1948), managed it in a veryprofitable nos. 24 and 102 (1421). On 23 July 1425, the Venetian Senate, at the request of the inhabitantsof Thessathe e salaries paid to "certi gentilhomeni gentilhomeni picioli," who formed guard lonica, raised the monthly Mamoli, of the city. Among those who had theirsalaries raised from70 to 100 aspres were Argyropoulos, Constantinos Argyropoulos,and loannes Melachrinos, son of Georgios Argyropoulos,while Demetrios would receive20 aspresper monthin additionto his salary: Mertzios,op. cit.,50-52; cf.Thiriet, Argyropoulos 372-74. 98 Miklosichand Miiller,op. cit.,II, (supra, note 13), II, no. 1995. Rdgestes

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

203

and remembered that these were difficult abnormaltimes,as Perdikaresclaimed; also, that the lender accepted a compromise, probably because he knew that Perdikarescould not pay offthe entiredebt. Nevertheless, is importantthat it Byzantine merchantsfunctionedin conditionswhere noneconomicfactors innormalfinancial trudedheavilyon otherwise transactions. The patterns established above for Byzantine merchantsin Constantinople for hold true generally the first half of the fifteenth The city of Constancentury. tinople, despite the several catastropheswhich had befallenthe Byzantine Emcentersof the Levant. Foreignvisitors pire,was still one of the great commercial were usually struckby the fact that the city no longerhad its former magnificence or its impressive population; Pero Tafur was only one of many who found "the inhabitants...not well clad, but sad and poor, showing hardshipof their the lot .... " Nevertheless, all the travelersalso mentionthat the city had virtually a good harbor,whichwas regularly of galleysand otherships,while the most full was the one along the Golden Horn, facingPera. Here, wrote populous quarter warehousesand shops Clavijo who had seen it in 1403, "there are innumerable forthe sale of all sortsofgoods. Hitherthe traders and storethe merchandise bring that comes in fromoverseas." Thirty years later, Bertrandonde la Broquibre still saw many foreign merchantsin Constantinople and realized that the Venetians were supremehere,as the Genoese werein Pera.99Although both forVenice and for Genoa the city did not occupy the firstplace in their eastern trade, it was an importantmarketforWesterngoods and a place where the alimentary productsand raw materialsof the East and a fewspices could be purchased.Venetian and Genoese agents bought here the productsof Asia Minor, the Balkans, and the Black Sea area, reexported themto Europe,and importedcloth,as in the past.100This trade was substantial. The accounts of Giacomo Badoer show an annual turnover 26,000 ducats (67,000 hyperpyra), he was only one of the of and Venetianmen of affairs, and not an exceptionally greatone.'0' The participationof the Greeks in this trade is visible throughthe accounts of Badoer.102 In termsof numbers, Greeksare the largestsinglegroupof merthe chants: twenty-seven percentwhen one eliminatesthose fromthe Venetian colonies. But in termsof value of transactions, theirparticipation disproportionately is small, being twenty-five percentof the value of goods purchased,and only nine and a halfpercentof the value of goods sold to Badoer.'03The point hereis clear:
99 Clavijo, Embassy to Tamerlane, 1403-06, trans. G. Le Strange (New York-London, 1928), 88-89; Pero Tafur, Travelsand Adventures, 1435-1439,trans.M. Letts (London, 1926), 146; Le voyaged'Outremer de Bertrandonde la Broquidre,ed. C. Schefer (Paris, 1892), 141-69, esp. 153 and 164; Chr. Buondelmonti, florentiniLibrum insularum archipelagi,ed. G. R. L. de Sinner (Leipzig-Berlin, 1824), 124-25; of. J. et Ebersolt, Constantinople les voyageurs Levant (Paris, 1919), 45ff.; and A. M. Schneider,"Die Bev61du kerungKonstantinopelsim XV. Jahrhundert," NachrG6tt,Philol.-hist.K1.(1949), 233-37. 100 Thiriet,Romanie (supra, note 5), 419-28; Heers, Genes (supra, note 5), 379-85, stressesthe decline in importanceof Constantinopleand Pera; ?itikov,"Konstantinopolj" (supra,note 22), 48-52, stressesthe importanceof the city. Cf. F. C. Lane, Andrea Barbarigo,Merchantof Venice,1418-1449 (Baltimore, 1944). 101 Sitikov, "Konstantinopolj," 51-52; a slightlydifferent is figure given by T. Bertel6,"Il giro d'affari di Giacomo Badoer: Precisazionii deduzioni,"A kten XI. Internationalen des Byzantinistenkongresses (Munich, 1960), 48-57. 102 Badoer's text has been studied thoroughlyby ?itikov and lately by Oikonomides, op. cit. (supra, ed. note *). I have used Sitikov's study extensively, adding a few commentsof my own. 108 Sitikov,"Konstantinopolj," Table 1, p. 53.

204

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

is the Greek trade with the westerners a deficit one, and the Constantinopolitan market has become a market of consumptionof foreign cloth. goods, primarily For the Venetians and, especially,forthe Genoese,on the otherhand, the trade was quite profitable. The Byzantine Greekswho engaged in trade (I am excludingthe Cretans and involvedin retail sales. They bought the people fromNegroponte)were primarily cloth and sold skins, wax, wool, grain, some raw silk. They formedcompanies, usually with small capital, and their activities were limited to Constantinople and its environs, althoughone man made the journeyto Brusa, then a significant in centerof the Levantine trade.'04More interesting, some ways, are the bankers. in Three out of the ten bankersmentioned Badoer's accountsare Greek: "Caloiani The and "CostantinCritopulo."'105 richest Sofiano,""Caloiani Sardino" (Sarandenos), whichmakeshimcompaof ofthem,Sophianos,had a turnover 10,751 hyperpyra, who appear in Badoer's books. The rable to all but two of the Westernbankers is of proofof the dependent importance bankers,as opposed to traders, one further invested natureof the Byzantine economy,forits capital could not be profitably in a commercialactivitythat was controlled others; it was easierand perhaps by to more profitable engagein moneytransactions. so As in the first century, now the presenceof aristocratic years of the fifteenth Greek names is surprisingly strong.Amongthe traderswe findAndrea and "Sea bastian" Argiro, Synadenos,a Laskaris,a Vatatzes, a Filomatis,a Tagaris,Demetrios Palaiologos, a Kantakouzenos, the Grand Duke Lucas Notaras, and the The latter, togetherwith another imperial Demetrius Notaras.106 commerciarius Constantine"Paleologo," "kefale" of Agathopolison the Black Sea coast, official, It sold Badoer grain and honeyin relatively large quantities.107 is also interesting that there are familieswhichhad been engaged in trade and connectedwith the we Italians forgenerations. Apart fromthe Argyropouloi, findhere a Sophianos, who appears also in the Greekdocumentsof 1400, whilethe names Frangopoulos, Sarandinos,and Vassilikos may be foundin Chilia in the early 1360's as well as and of The prosopography the Byzantinemerchants in the accounts of Badoer.08s it bankers remains to be established.Nevertheless, is evident that the connecand Greek merchantsand aristocratswere close tions betweenItalian merchants and long-standing;perhaps this closeness may be symbolicallyrepresented by "The tradingquarterof the city is down by the gates which Clavijo's description: open on the strand (of the Golden Horn) and whichare facingthe opposite gates whichpertainto the cityof Pera: forit is herethat the galleysand smallervessels theircargoes: and hereby the strandis it that the people come to portto discharge and of Pera meetthoseof Constantinople transacttheirbusinessand commerce."'09 The presenceof the Byzantine aristocracyamong the merchantsand bankers in of Constantinople the last years of its existenceas a Byzantinecity serves as
104 Badoer (supra, note 7), p. 74. 1O5Badoer, passim; and Sitikov, "Konstantinopolj," Table 2, p. 55. Badoer, passim, especially pp. 59, 68, 74, 108-9, 148, 202, 135, 221, 262, 249, 280, and 285. 106
Badoer, 109, 148, 285. 108Badoer, passim, especially pp. 7, 29, 59; and supra, pp. 197-98. o109 Clavijo, op. cit. (supra, note 99), 88.
107

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

205

of of of a reminder thecomplexity thesocialand economicdevelopment the late EmThat the Byzantine state was at this time virtuallynonexistenteconomipire. cally and politicallyis almost a clich6. But the same conditionswhich spelled its demise created a situation favorable for specificsocial groups. In the fourteenth century,the Byzantine aristocracywas rich in lands and revenuesfrom In half of the fifteenth, therewas in Constantinople merchant a land.110 the first in and bankerclass whichhad capital, sometimes considerable amounts,and which invested and multiplied in the Italian-dominated it markets.It is not surprising, then, that the Venetian observerof the fall of Constantinople, Niccol6 Barbaro, should note that therewere in the city men of great property who did not use their money to provide forits defense; nor is it surprising that Lucas Notaras, famedforhis supposed preference the Turkishturbanover the Latin of unjustly Mehmed II for his life; or tiara, should have vast amounts of treasureto offer that the bulk of this money should have been in Italy."' Constantinople was a at city of contradictions this time: a relativelysmall city, with the bulk of its inhabitants but linkedto the Italian trade."2 impoverished, witha wealthy minority The Byzantinemerchant not to be soughtmerely Constantinople on the is in and Black Sea coasts. On the contrary, thereis sufficient evidence to posit the existence of an active commercial in the provinces, life althoughmany of the details are still hidden in obscurity.Byzantine merchantsare evident throughout the the most active provincialtrade centers Thessalonica,the are Palaeologan period; Despotate of the Morea, especially Monemvasia, and, in Epirus, Janina and The evidenceis, unfortunately, Arta.113 it Nevertheless, is fragmented. extremely the activities theseprovincial of possible to reach a first approximation concerning traders. A list of complaints, presentedby the Byzantinesto the Venetiangovernment in 1319, shows that therewere a numberof merchants active in Mistra,Movem110 Cf. Ostrogorsky, "Aristocracy" (supra, note 4), passim; and Laiou, "Aristocracy" (supra, note 4), passim. 111Georgios Memorii 1401-1477, ed. V. Grecu (Bucharest, 1966), 433-34; Laonici ChalcoconSphrantzes, ed. demonstrationes, E. Dark6, II (Budapest, 1923), 165-66; Ducas Istoria Turco-Bizantina dylaeHistoriarum (1341-1462), ed. V. Grecu (Bucharest,1958), 329; Niccol6 Barbaro, Diary oftheSiege ofConstantinople, trans. J. R. Jones(New York, 1969), 76. One "gentleman"was relievedof 30,000 ducats by the Turks; he may have been Lucas Notaras. 112Thus, in the late 14th century, DemetriusCydones fearedboth that povertywould soon be extended to the rich and that the miseryof the poor of Constantinople would lead to civil war: Ddmdtrius Cydonhs, ed. R.-J. Loenertz, II (Vatican City, 1960), letters nos. 442 (1391) and 433 (1391). Correspondance, As earlier,I am leaving out of consideration merchants the who came fromareas that had been under 118 extended Venetian, Genoese, or other Westernoccupation, such as Chios, Crete,Negroponte,Rhodes, etc. The reason for this exclusion is that the developmentof these areas is very different fromthat of the and sailorsoftheselands operatedunderdifferent "Byzantine" mainlandand thatthetradersand shipmasters whichmerita separate examination.It should be noted that,in the first conditions, halfofthe 15thcentury, the commercialactivity of the Greek inhabitants of the Venetian colonies increased: Thiriet, Romanie (supra, note 5), 420. In the course of the 14th and 15th centuries,most Byzantine possessions acquired different masters: Western,Serbian, or Ottoman. In such cases, it would be pedantic and formalistic exclude the tradersof to these areas, as long as conquest did not bringwithit a profound of changein the economicstructure the area or the activities of the inhabitants.Thus, it would serve no realistic purpose to exclude the merchantsof Thessalonica forthose periods in which the city was under Ottoman or Venetian control,and it would be absurdto stop discussing merchants Artain thelate 14thcentury, the of whenthecityfellunderthesuzerainty of the Tocci of Cephalonia.

206

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

and Thessalonica,as well as in Constantinople. These people vasia and its environs, their boats capturedby theVenetians. had had theirmerchandise and, occasionally, The sums for which they requested reparationsand which representthe value which of their merchandiseare oftenvery high, even allowingfor the inflation is inevitable in this kind of source. MerchantsfromThessalonica and Constansome people fromMistra lost 4,000 tinople claimed losses of 10,000 hyperpyra; while a man called Maurosumi,fromMonemvasia,claimed a loss of hyperpyra, In were in 2,200 hyperpyra cloth, oil, cash, and arms.114 all, 29,300 hyperpyra requestedas reparations. in mentioned this list were concentrated the in The activitiesof the merchants Aegean Sea. But thereis mentionof one man who was involvedin long-distance trade, a certain Sophonias Atheneas; "homo... imperatoris,"he had traveled to Alexandria,presumablyfor spices, and on the returnjourney went to Crete. in worth150 hyperpyra, a sea loan or commenda He gave to a Venetianmerchandise contract; then, he was detained in Crete, lost his investment,and demanded reparations. Among these Greeks, the Monemvasiotsappear as a particularlysignificant category.Other sources indicate that Monemvasiawas a very importanttrading the fourteenth centuryand that its merchantstraveled in the city throughout Byzantine Empire and the Black Sea tradingin all sorts of commodities.Two of these tradersappear in the Genoese notarial documentsfromlate thirteenthcenturyCaffa,while in 1309 a galley fromMonemvasia (it is not clear whether its occupants were merchants,pirates, or both) was pursued by sailors from Coron and broughtto Crete.15 The importanceof the Monemvasiotmerchants documentsgrantedthem and silver-sealed is illustrated the various chrysobulls by and despotsof the Morea. by Byzantineemperors The chrysobullof AndronicusII (1284), renewingprivilegesgranted to the Monemvasiotsby Michael VIII, exempts them fromtaxes on theirlanded proon perties and frompaying the commercium their transactionswithin MonemIII of vasia itself.In 1328, a prostagma Andronicus renewedthe privileges given AndronicusII to the Monemvasiotswho had abandoned their city when it by fell under Frankish occupation (1248) and had settled in Pegai in Asia Minor. of These merchantswere to pay a commercium two percentin Constantinople, Heraclea, Selymbria, Rodosto, Gallipoli, Ainos, and all other coastal cities of Thrace, whereasthey would pay no duty at all in the otherparts of the Byzantine Empire. Those who bought or sold grain, animals, or anythingelse from the commercium.116 were also relievedfrom merchants the Monemvasiot
114 Thomas, Diplomatarium(supra, note 35), I, no. 72 (1319). The events described in this list range in in time fromDecember 1313 to 1316, with the greatestconcentration 1316. 115 Balard, Genes(supra,note 9), no. 438 (1290): "Nicolaus de Marvasia" buys fish;no. 529 (1290): Michael "Marvasiatus" sells in Caffa merchandiseto two Greeks who will pay him in Pera. For 1309, cf. Thiriet, Ddlibdrations (supra, note 5), I, no. 187. Miklosichand Miiller,op. cit. (supra,note 44), V, 154-55, 165-68; Sphrantzes,op. cit. (supra,note 111), 116 d'AndronicII en faveurde Monembasie," 538-42. Cf.St. Binon, "L'histoire et la l6gendede deux chrysobulles 37 (1938), 274-311; and E. Frances, "La fdodalit6et les villes byzantines au XIIIe et XIVe siecle," EO, of 16 Byzantinoslavica, (1955), 76-96. For the date and authenticity the chrysobullof 1316, see F. D61ger, Reiches,IV (Munich-Berlin, 1960), no. 2383. He thinks der Kaiserurkundendes Ostr6mischen Regesten of that the chrysobullwas a forgery the metropolitan Monemvasia,Makarios, who, however,had before by

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

207

whose date and For the merchantsof Monemvasiaitself,thereis a chrysobull have long been disputed. The text of the "chrysobull"is given by authenticity Maius. This text reproduces, Makarios Melissenos,the author of the Chronicon of III to a large extent,that of theprostagma Andronicus but adds that the priviof are grantedto the Monemvasiots Pegai and ofMonemvasia, who are settled leges or in Constantinople in othercities of the Empire. The "chrysobull"states that the commercium Constantinople and in the Thracian cities is lowered to one in abolishedin the Peloponnese. Schreiner P. considers that the percentand is entirely is a fabrication based on thetextoftheprostagma. his argumenHowever, chrysobull tation is not conclusive.The "chrysobull"presentscertain new elements,speciIt ficallysome taxes which are absent fromthe text of the prostagma. also mentions the activitiesof the merchantsof Monemvasia in cities like Zagora, Sozoand polis, Agathopolis,Medeia, activitieswhich do not appear in the prostagma which Melissenoshad no compelling reason to add. It is, still, probable that Melissenoscopied (perhapswithsome changes,intentional not) an authentic or chrysobull which had been based on the text of theprostagma Andronicus (thereof III fore,to be dated after1328 and withinthe reignof this emperor)and whichgave the merchants Monemvasiathe same privileges thoseenjoyedby the Monemof as vasiots of Pegai. If the chrysobullis accepted as basically genuine,it provides an interesting in obserpictureof the tradingactivitiesof the Monemvasiots this period.A first vation is that the Monemvasiotstraveled widelywithin the ByzantineEmpire. Some of them resided in Constantinople well as in other cities. They traded as in the capital, in Selymbria,in Heracleia, Rodosto, Gallipoli, and "other Macedonian (=Thracian) cities." They sailed in the Black Sea and the Aegean,bringing merchandiseto Constantinople. They also crossed the Black Sea along the east-westaxis. And theyengagedin trade by land, fortheycarriedcattle or other merchandise from Zagora to Sozopolis,Medeia,or Agathopolis."7They wereactive in the Peloponnese itself, especially in the various fairs that were held there. the productsthey bought and sold were grain, oil, Accordingto the chrysobull, salted meat, skins,cloth,linen,and cattle. The Monemvasiot merchants made good use ofthe privileges apparently granted to them. In the early 1340's, they traveled to Constantinople often regularly, for tradingpurposes; some were settled there. They were known as an ancient Kxai to II-who had seafaring according Andronicus people-tKxav6TrrXoov SaXaTToupy6v, once been famed as fighters sea and who now made theirlivingby trade. On at one of their trips to Constantinople, some of these merchants broughttheir absenteebishop,Isidore,300 hyperpyra from revenuesof his see."s the
him an authenticdocument.The latest word on the subject is by P. Schreiner, "Ein ProstagmaAndronikos' III. fir die Monembasiotenin Pegai (1328) und das gefalschte Andronikos'II. fiirdie MonembaChrysobull sioten im byzantinischen Reich," JOB, 27 (1978), 203-28. 117Miklosichand Miiller,op. cit., V, 167. 118Papadopoulos-Kerameus, op. cit. (supra, note 26), 85-88. For the date (1341-end of 1344), cf. d Introduction l'dtude Grdgoire de Palamas (Paris, 1959), 90, 105-6, 109-15. For the reference J. Meyendorff, to AndronicusII, cf. Miklosichand Miiller,op. cit.,V, 156.

208

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

In the second half of the fourteenth century,the Greeks of the Despotate of seem to have had an active the Morea (amongthem,no doubt,the Monemvasiots) trade with the Venetian possessionsin the peninsula, and perhaps with Crete. Relations between them and the Venetians were not always friendly. Thus, in a quarrel arose betweenModon and Coron and the Despotate of the Morea, 1376, the and the Senate instructed castellansof the two townsto cooperatewithVenemeasuresagainstthe Greekmerchants."9 in tian merchants orderto devise further Accordingto existingtreaties,the Venetians were supposed to allow Greeks to whichwas normally trade in Venetianpossessionswithoutpayingthe commercium merchants. exacted fromforeign Still,the Greekscomplainedthat theypaid excesand sive taxesin theVenetianterritories, theissuewas important enoughto be raised for in the negotiations the renewalof the treatiesbetweenVenice and Byzantium of in in 1362. Later in the century, 1390, we findthe Greekmerchants the Morea in sellingtheirmerchandise the Venetianportsof Modon and Coron; the Venetian fromusing on government, the otherhand, triedto discourageits own merchants the portsof the Despotate of the Morea.120 was a very difficult half of the fifteenth The first period forthe Despocentury tate of the Morea, primarilybecause of troubles with the Navarrese, internal and, finally,the Ottoman invasions, especially the disastrous one of conflicts, 1446. Economically,too, the situationmust have been unpleasant; even so, Greek continuedto be active in trade, probablysmall-scale,withinthe Pelomerchants with the Venetiansbecame, at times,intense,espeponnesus. Their competition cially afterthe Byzantineshad recoveredthe big ports of Clarentza and Patras bought (1428). In 1430,the Senate imposed a 10 percenttax on silk and cochenille in the Despotate of the Morea in an attempt to bring the Greek merchantsto Modon and Coron and to stop Venetians going to the Despotate. The measure failed and had to be abrogated a few years later. The Moreot tradersalso continued to travel to Crete,at least in the early years of the century.In 1405, the EmperorManuel II includedin his peace proposals to Venice a request that Byzantine subjects tradingin Crete "should be treated accordingto existingagreeof limitations the Empire at this time,it is to be Given the geographic ments."'121 assumed that the Byzantine subjects tradingin Crete were primarilyfromthe Peloponnesus. Internally,the Monemvasiotsretained their privileges,paying no customs or the otherduties throughout Despotate of the Morea. Withintheirown city,they
and but it was to be used only for purposes of self-defense, paid a commercium, the city walls.122 especially for the building and upkeep of As in the Peloponnesus, so in Epirus and Thessaly therewere Greek merchantswho were active both within their own immediate area and outside it. The evidence
(supra, note 119 Thiriet,Rdgestes 13), I, no. 578.

782 (1390), and 237 (1350); Thomas, Diplomatarium(supra, note 35), II, 84 (1362). no. 2508 (1439), 2274 (1432), 2679 (1445), and 2948 (1453). II, t12 Thiriet, Rdgestes, no. 2202 (1430); III, Cf. Zakythinos,op. cit. (supra, note 45), I, 152-74, 180ff.;II, 245-70. For 1405, see N. Iorga, Notesetextraits des d pour servir l'histoire croisadesau XVe si~cle,I (Paris, 1899), 144-46. 122Miklosichand Miiller,op. cit.,V, 170-75; Zakythinos,op. cit., I, 214-16.

1soCessi and Sambin, op. cit. (supra,note 5), VIII, 46 (August 1324); Thiriet,Rdgestes, nos. 342 (1359), I,

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

209

more than signal the exishere is sporadic,and it is not possible to do anything tenceofsuch people and describein broad termsthe scope of theiractivities.The of merchants Janinahave longbeen recognizedas a particularly important group, in since AndronicusII foundit necessaryto give them extensiveprivileges 1319, when he recoveredthe city. The inhabitantsof Janina were then granteda cerwere guaranteed their traditionalfreedomsand tain degree of self-government, privileges,and were freedfrommost taxes. The merchantswere released from on the obligationof paying the commercium theircommercial transactions within Janina and in all other cities and fortsof the Byzantine Empire; they could and withouthindrance trade freely wherever theywanted,even in Constantinople itself.123 While these privilegesare more extensivethan those grantedto Monemvasia a fewyears earlier,it does not necessarily followthat the merchantsof Janina were economicallymore active or morepowerful than those of Monemvasia. The blanket privilegesare probably due to the political necessityof co-opting the inhabitantswho had themselvessurrendered the city. And they may also mean that the commercial activitiesof the people of Janinawere primarily geared to Epirus itselfand the Balkan peninsulaand did not extend very oftento Conwhose commercium the one that most interested Emperor. was the stantinople, It is, indeed,this kind of local tradingactivitythat is dimlyvisiblein the early "Chronicle of Janina."124 In its hostilitytoward the Despot fifteenth-century Thomas Preljubovich,this source distinguishes three groups that suffered under his rule. First, there was the Church,whose propertywas confiscated.Second, E membersof the aristocracy(Trov yEVEaT&rOV were exiled or forcedto apx6vTrcov) flee.And finally, moved against the people of the kastron he (0Toi?ao0oKa-Trpou), TOJ some of whom were very rich, and had their propertyconfiscated. Among the various exactions he imposed were taxes on the sale of wine and various other duties and taxes, whichseem to have hit the guildsand the merchants. The "mohe imposed on wine, wheat, meat, cheese, fruit, and fishmust have hit nopoly" both the producersof these commoditiesand the merchantswho, presumably, imported them.125Admittedly,the economic evidence given by this otherwise alimenvery importantsource is limited.But the ratherprecise data concerning and the absence of any measures that would tap the wealth tary products of merchantsengaged in long-distancetrade might argue that Janina was primarilya centeroflocal exchange. Greeksfromboth Epirus and the Peloponnesusalso appear in Ragusan sources in the firsthalf of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.Their place of origin is not easy to determine, in the documentation for the general term "Greek" is used to denote Greeksfromall areas of the old ByzantineEmpire,including those
Published by S. C. Estopafian, Bizancio y Espaia. El legado de la basilissa Maria y de los dispotas Thomasy Esau"de Joannina, II (Barcelona, 1943); for the date, see ibid., 70. Cf. L. Vranoussis,T6 XpOViKi6V
124

12SMiklosichand Miiller,op. cit.,V, 77-84; cf. Franc6s, op. cit., 91.

toriensbyzantinsqui n'ont jamais existS: Comnenoset Proclos," ibid., 23-29. 125Estopafian,op. cit.,II, chaps. X, XI, XXI (theinformation refers the late 1360's and the late 1370's). to "Monopolion," exercised in this case by Thomas and his friends,is a practice wherebyno one may sell until the privilegedperson has sold his storeof such commodities:cf. V. Mo'in, "Akti specifiedcommodities iz svetogorskih arhiva," SpomSAN, 91 (1939), 166.

in 'ETir.MEC.'ApX., 12 (1962), 57-115; r'cOv 'Icoavvivcov KaT'av~KSOTrov 851 di851 1TiTOI.lyv,

and idem, "Deux his-

210

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

under Western occupation.But where originis specified,Epirus and the Peloponnesuspredominate. half of the fourteenth In the first to centurythereare a few references Greeks in Dubrovnikor had dealings with the city. A Greek named Stance who traded formedan association with three other people for maritimetrade; a man from Arta sold some wine to two Ragusans, while a Greek fromZadar was involved in the graintrade,perhapswithGreeceor the Morea. Merchants the "Romania" of in witha largepurchaseof wheat made by the commune are mentioned connection in of Dubrovnik in Thessalonica and Constantinople 1339. Here, the merchants in question were not necessarily provincialones; they were fromthe capital and the second largestcity of the Empire,and theywereinvolvedalong with Genoese in merchants ratherlarge wheat transactions.126 In the fifty years from1350 to 1400, thereis only one mentionof a Greekinvolved in trade: TheodorosAngelosof Thessaly participatedin the purchase of This inactivity some wheat forDubrovnikfroma certainBlasius, sebastocrator.'27 unsettledsituation,especiallyin western was probablythe resultof the extremely afterthe civil wars, the conquest by Stephen Dugan, and the Albanian Greece, the invasionsof Epirus. On the contrary, numberof Greeksincreasedin the next Some came fromthe core of the ByzantineEmpire; thus,a Theodore sixtyyears. in Catharo fromThessalonica had various affairs Dubrovnikin 1424-25. A Greek from Serresboughtcloth in Dubrovnikand sent money to Venice foran unknown lived in DuA reason.'128 man called Ser Michael Tessariti fromConstantinople brovnikin 1417 and engaged a servant. His businessis not known,but he may Some of these people conducted long-distancetrade. have been a merchant.129 son Manuel Zaliotus fromConstantinople, of Paschal, had a ship withwhich Thus, he brought Sicilyto Dubrovnik;in 1436,he made an exchangecontract grainfrom in to witha Sicilianand undertook sail to Sicilyagain.A Greekshiparrived Dubrovnik in 1407, carryingcloth fromVenice. But the majorityof the trading ventures of these Greeks spanned rathershorterdistances. The merchantstraveled from Arta, or fromotherunnamed parts of Greece,to Dubrovnik.They seem to have of been primarilyinvolved in the provisioning Dubrovnik with wheat, millet, We barley, meat, cheese, linen, wine, and other food products.130 do not, unforhave any details about their capital or about the ways they used to tunately, financetheirtrade. But they seem, forthe most part, to have been ratherpetty on small quantitiesof merchandise theirboats. traders, transferring That thereis, then,a Byzantinemerchantand banker class in the Palaeologan period can hardly be doubted; the Western economic presence did not destroy But thismerchant the Byzantinemerchant. operatedin an economicsystemwhich
126 128 Ibid., nos. 686, 688, 690, and 729. The man's name was Turnich, or Tornikios Yanitzopoulos. On "La prise de Serrespar les Turcs," Byzantion,35 (1965), 302-19. Serres,see G. Ostrogorsky, 129 Kreki6,op. cit.,no. 632. 130Ibid., nos. 888, 891, 893, 895, 905, 533, 667, 728, 1103, 762, 810, 923, 986, 929, 930, 870, 873, 879, 963, 981, and 1219.

1I1 Ibid., no. 251 (1364).

Kreki6,op. cit. (supra, note 24), nos. 114, 173, 190, and 186.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

211

was heavily dominatedby Italians. The greatestdisabilityof the Byzantineswas that they could not participatein the primaryformsof international trade, for for the most important the Italians controlled prerequisites this: communications their fleets,the money markets throughtheir elaborate banking and through mechanismsthroughtheir system of financialtechniques,and the information in all importanttrade centers.Thus it was that the Byzantines representatives rarelywere able to gain access to the Westernand Italian markets.Their access to the great ports of the Black Sea was also severelylimited.But, althoughthey did not trade much in Caffaor Tana, they were allowed-perhaps encouragedto invest their money and even to trade in the smallermarketsof the Danube delta.Here,the Greeksplayed a serviceroleto theItalians: theycollectedthe grain, they invested theirmoney,and the end product of theiractivitywas channeled to Pera to be used locally or to be sent to Genoa. The same can be said about in the Greek bankerswhom we see in Constantinople the fifteenth century.They in had capital, sometimes ratherlarge sums,but theyinvestedit in a moneyand marketcontrolled the Italians. As forthe provincialGreek mercommodities by chant, he, too, could carry out his activities; but he, too, simply participated in an economicsystemin whichhe did not have the possibility takingthe iniof decisions. tiativeor of makingimportant The Byzantine merchantcould act withinrelativelynarrowgeographiclimits, and his activitieswere secondary.He played the role of intermediary the Italfor and he engaged primarily retail trade. Significantly, was these retail in it ians, activitiesthat Byzantine emperors-or the merchantsthemselves-triedto safein in guard fromItalian competition, Constantinople the early fourteenth century as in Thessalonicain the earlyfifteenth.131 once in the periodunderdiscussion Only did the Byzantinestry to break out of this constricted situation.This was in the late 1340's, when theirships sailed to the grainmarketsof the Black Sea and the and its own began to take measures to protect the merchantmen government maritimeinterests.But the answer to this Byzantine challengewas quick and effective:force, normallyunnecessary,was now used, and the Black Sea was, once again, closed to Byzantinetraders,except on the sufferance the Genoese. of As is well known,the undoubted economicpredominance the Italian merof chants had a political-legalfoundation upon the privilegesgranted them by rulers. In the Byzantine Empire, Byzantine and other Eastern Mediterranean commercialprivilegeswere given to the Venetians in 1082 and to the Genoese

and Pisans later in the Comnenian period. But it was after the recapture of ConThe Venetians stantinople in 1261 that these privileges became most extensive.132 and Genoese were freedfromthe 10 percent import-exporttax and fromvirtually all
181

Thiriet, Rdgestes (supra, note 13), II, no. 1995. In 1319-20, the Venetians complained that they were not allowed to sell cloth and otherthingswholesale or retail in Constantinople and that Venetian fishermen and butchers wereharassedwhentheytriedto sell theirproductsin the usual places: Thomas,Diplomatarium (supra, note 35) I, 165. 132Apart fromHeyd, op. cit. (supra, note 5), cf.also S. Borsari,"Per la storiadel commercio venezianocol mondo bizantino nel XII secolo", RSI, 88 (1976), 104-26; idem,"I1 crisobullod'Alessio I per Venezia," Annali dell' IstitutoItaliano per gli Studi Storici,2 (Naples, 1970), 111-23; Balard, "Les G6nois" (supra, note 29), 467-502.

212

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

theirplaces otherduties. They receivedthe rightto have theirown government, of residence,their weights and measures, and their own courts, which meant that they could judge commercialcases accordingto theirown laws and not acoften insensitive economic to needs. It is a measure to cording thelocal legal system, of the power and importanceof these privilegesthat many Byzantines tried to in may citizenship orderto benefitfromthem. This phenomenon acquire foreign be observed among membersof the upper class. In 1362, the Emperor John V complained that a certain "Manoli protovestiarius,"although a Greek born in to and pretended be a Venetianquandotraficat Constantinople livingin Mesembria, The ambassadors Nicholas Notaras (1377) and Demetrius in Constantinopoli.133 Cydones (1391) sought and received Venetian citizenship.134In 1373, the grand Alexius, who had already been grantedby John V extensiveterriprimmikerios to and Anaktoropolis governin hereditary toriesin Thasos, Christopolis, fashion, to Venice and requestedthat he and his sons and heirsbe made Venetian wrote citizens and be accepted among the Venetian nobles in the name of the friendship which he professedtoward Venice. In January 1374, a decree of Andrea Contarinograntedthis request and gave Alexius all the privilegesof a Venetian citizen: in Venetumet civemnostrum recepimusatque recipimus,et Venetumet in civemnostrum fecimusetfacimus,et pro Venetoet cive nostro Venetijiset extra The et extrameant that Alexius had the privivolumuset tractari. haberi ubilibet of a Venetian even outside Venice itself,including,presumably, Byzantine leges
territories.135

Not only the aristocracybut many other, nameless people sought Venetian the citizenshipof or Genoese citizenship.Some were gasmouloi,who preferred and tavernkeepersin Constantinople, theirItalian parent.There were fishermen, used this expedientin order to avoid paying the Byzantine many traderswho entaxes and duties and presumablyalso to benefitfromall the otherprivileges Various emperors-AndronicusII, John VI, joyed by the Italian merchant. John V-complained bitterlyabout the acquiescence or indeed encouragement to given by Venetian and Genoese officials such practices,but the complaints do not seem to have had much effect.136 with The question of Byzantinestate policymust also be studied in connection the economic developmentsdiscussed here. It is an importantquestion, for alII, Thomas, Diplomatarium, 82ff. J. W. Barker, Manuel II Palaeologus, 1391-1425 (New Brunswick, 1969), 486-87; R.-J. Loenertz, "D6m6triusCydones,citoyende Venise," EO, 37 (1938), 125-26. 135 Thomas, Diplomatarium, II, no. 98, p. 164. Italian protectionwas soughtforgoods as well as persons. of For example, Georgios Eudaimonoiannis, megas stratopedarches Theodore II, Despot of the Morea, depositedhis moneywiththe Venetiansin Modon and Coron: see lorga, op. cit. (supra,note 121), III (Paris,
133

184

(supra, note 13), I, nos. 237, 342 (1359), and 438 (1369); Thomas, DiplomatariumI, 186Thiriet, Rdgestes op. 452; II, no. 49; Chrysostomides, cit. (supra, note 25), 276-89, and documentsnos. 4 and 6. For Andronicus II, see Laiou, Constantinople (supra, note 19), 260ff.,308-11. In 1362, the Byzantine government released complained to Venice that Greek subjects had become Venetian citizens and were consequently fromtheirfiscalobligationsto the Byzantinetreasury.These must have been traders,forthey werepaying Venice thenpromisednot to make any moreGreeksintoVenetiancitizens:Thomas, Diplomaa commercium; tarium,II, no. 49. This clause does not appear in subsequent treaties.There are also statementsconcerning the reverse process, by which Venetians had been "made Greeks"; at Venice's request, the Byzantine 135 agreed to treat them no longeras Greeks,but as Venetians: ibid., I, no. 80 (1320); II, no. government op. cit.,no. 12 (1369-70). (1390); Chrysostomides,

21-22 (1437). 1902),

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

213

this period, though the power of the state diminishedprogressively throughout we are, nervertheless, in a precapitalist still in whichpoliticalmeasures economy, played an importantrole in economicrelations.There is no reason to discuss in detail the provisionsof the various agreements which the Palaeologan emperors made with the Italian merchantcities.'37It is sufficient place them in perto The Byzantinestate had allowed the Italians to trade freely spective. throughout the Byzantine Empire; it reduced or abolished the duties and taxes attendant upon commercialactivity; it gave the Italians places of residenceand the right to have their own weightsand measures and their own courts. These privileges were requestedfor a varietyof economicand political reasons and were granted for political expediencies.In themselvesthey did not create the kind of international market I have described.That was created by other factorsconnected with the economic and social developmentof Western Europe and even with conditionsin the Far East. But the effect the privilegeswas to removesome of of the obstacles to the functioning such a marketand therefore help in its of to the Byzantinestate eliminated some extentpoliticalfactors to Thus, development. in the economic process and permittedthe functioning institutions of necessary to a commercial commercial courts.This was not, of course,a coneconomy,e.g., scious aim, but it was inherent the privileges in granted.Some of these privileges the Byzantinestate laterhad to extendto particular classes,groups,or individuals fromamong its own subjects. And despite its virtual abdication of authority, it did not entirely abandon its traditional effort interfere economicmatters. to in The series of agreementsmade between Byzantine emperorsand the Italian cities in the thirteenth the early fifteenth to centuriescontainedsome measures which may be termed traditionalist and which aimed at protectingthe urban the retail trader,and to a smallerextent the producer.The emperors consumer, tried particularly regulatethe sale, export,and price of wheat, the most imto item of consumption.138The regulationstook two forms,the firstone portant the sale and exportof wheat grownwithinthe ByzantineEmpire. In concerning the Venetian-Byzantine treatyof 1260, it was stated that Venice could not export rose Byzantinewheatwhenits priceat Constantinople beyond50 hyperpyra cenper tenarium;this was changed to 100 hyperpyra 1277 and remainedat that level in the Palaeologan period. At the time these regulationswere enacted, throughout constituteda clear effort protect the Byzantine consumer at times of to they great scarcity;if the Italians were allowed to buy and exportwheat, they would raise its pricefurther reducethe amountof wheat available to the Byzantines. and This is why, in the treatyof 1310, it was stated that Venetians could not even buy and sell grainif its pricerose above 100 hyperpyra centenarium; per thus, not only the export of wheat, but even tradingin it was forbidden Westerners. to there was no provision for the possibilityof obtaining imperial Furthermore, to export wheat when its price rose to this high level.'39A similar permission
1837 Along with Heyd, op. cit. (supra, note 5), passim, and Chrysostomides, cit.;see D. Minne,"A propos op. des privilegesv6nitiens sous les Paleologues," Bulletinde la FacultddesLettres Strasbourg, (1970), 235-41. de 48 x18Chrysostomides, cit., 268ff.;cf. Pegolotti,op. cit. (supra, note 11), 41-42. op. xs3 Thomas, Diplomatarium, no. 46. I,

214

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

G. Bertolotto,"Nuova serie di documentisulle relazioni di Genova coll'impero bizantino," Attidella the SocietdLiguredi Storia Patria, 28 (1898), 503. The same policy is subsumed in a decree forbidding export I, of legumesfromThessalonica: Thomas, Diplomatarium, no. 80 (1320), p. 166. 64-73. '4' Chrysostomides, op. cit.,314-15; Laiou, Constantinople, Handelszur 142 For the treatisesof 1277 and 1285, see G. L. Tafel and G. M. Thomas, Urhunden dlteren mit auf der und Staatsgeschichte RepublikVenedig besonderen Beziehungen Byzanz und die Levante,III (Vienna, 1857), 133-49 and 339-53; and Miklosich and Miiller,op. cit. (supra, note 44), III, 84-96. For 1319, see 57-65, 273ff. I, Thomas, Diplomatarium, no. 77, p. 141; cf. Laiou, Constantinople, 262-63. Laiou, Constantinople, 143 144Thomas, Diplomatarium, no. 80, p. 165. I,
140

withGenoa was less precise,statingsimplythat exportof wheat would agreement be allowed only after imperial permission.140That this is political interference of and in the functioning the marketis clear. It is also relein price formation that both Venetiansand Genoese did buy and try to export Byvant, however, zantine wheat at prices above the ceiling.'4 Imperial officials, perhaps people fromthe imperial domain, as well as various aristocratswere guilty of contraveningthe treatiesand sellingwheat at what must have been true famineprices. As a result,the Venetians and the Genoese came to dominate the grain trade of the area, and to some extent-although not constantlyor completely-the of provisioning Constantinople. withthe sale withinthe Byzantine was concerned The second kind of regulation Black Sea grain,although of grainproducedoutsideit. This was primarily Empire of that of Asia Minorwas also involved.It is characteristic the creationof a single treatiesof 1277 and 1285 Black marketthat, whereasin the Venetian-Byzantine Sea grainwas not an issue, by 1317 it was; I take that to mean that by 1317 imports of wheat fromthe Black Sea area into the Byzantine Empire had become common.In the earliertreaties,it was simplystated that Black Sea grain could In be transported freelythroughByzantine territories. 1319, we findthe Byzanto tines trying regulatethe trade in Black Sea grain.AndronicusII insistedthat such grain should not be consideredin the same manner as other merchandise whose exchangewas freeof duties. Venice should not sell Black Sea grain in the Byzantine Empire, except with imperial license and after paying the commercium.142The Venetians produced long and elaborate argumentsabout how this contravenedthe treaties; and the subject is usually treated as merelymeaning to that the Byzantine emperorwas trying increasehis revenuesby this measure. the policy was more than a mere fiscal exercise,as can be seen from However, the fact that at about the same time (1317) the same emperorhad forbidden Furtherthe Genoese to sell wheat fromthe Bulgarian coast to Constantinople.43 Venetians complainedthat more, in 1320, the Venetian bailo at Constantinople were allowed to sell Black Sea grainonly afterpaying a tax (6 carats per modium) and that this so raised the pricethat "people go to othersratherthan to Venetians here clearlywas to help the Byzantinegrain producer, The effort [forgrain]."''144 although,since the sale of grain by Byzantineswas taxed, the revenuesof the failed too, for,in the treatiesof 1324-25 fiscwould also be increased.This effort dictated a conciliatory attitude,AndronicusII acwhen political circumstances cepted the Venetian position; fromthen on, Black Sea grain could be sold in the corn marketof Constantinople.'45 Byzantine Empire,but only outside the official

145Ibid., I, no. 98, p. 201.

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY

IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

215

About forty Black Sea years later, JohnV also triedto raise an issue concerning it was limitedto a proposal to levy a purchasetax on Greeksbuyinggrain grain; fromVenetians and to restrict Venetian sales to a single part of Constantinople. It was thus primarily fiscalmatter.'46 a It seems,then,that until the 1320's the Byzantinegovernment made concerted on the one hand, to keep the price of grain relativelylow by forbidding efforts, to foreigners buy Byzantinewheat and, on the otherhand, to protectthe Byzantine wheat producerby forbidding importof cheap Black Sea grain.The relthe atively low prices at which Venice was able to buy grain duringAndronicus' reignmay indicate a certainabundance of home-grown crops,possiblystimulated by his measures.'47 During the reign of AndronicusII, the Byzantine state was able for the last time to attempt to functionas a regulatorof importanteconomic activitiesin the area. Afterhis death, these attemptswere sharplyreduced in numberand to importance,with the exception of John VI's effort support Byzantine trade and increase port revenues.It may further observed that AndronicusII was be the last emperor who triedto protectfromthe Italians the activitiesof Byzantine merchantsthroughout the Empire, and the last one to be held responsibleby Venice and Genoa forinfractions the treatiesby imperialofficials removed of far fromConstantinople.148 Afterhis death, the rapid disintegration the Byzantine of terms,coupled with the decreased controlof imperialterriEmpire in territorial toriesby the centralgovernment, made it impossibleforthe Byzantineemperors to assume responsibility theirsubjects' commercialtransactions for outside Conor to try to legislate any economic regulationsoutside the capital. stantinople Indeed, this trend began with Andronicushimself.Thus, he extractedfromthe Monemvasiotmerchantsa two-percent valoremduty on transactions Conad in else stantinopleand in the cities of Thrace, but everywhere they were allowed to tradewithoutpaying any duty. He did not, presumably, controleconomicactivities outside this sphere. Afterthe 1320's, the decadent Byzantine state could no longer even pretend to regulateeconomiclife. Its meager legislationtried to protectthe interestsof wine and grainmerchants the capital, and the interests the fisc.Thus, JohnV in of asked the Venetians to trade their wheat in only one place in Constantinople, so presumably that he could decrease the fraudin termsof his revenues.But the Venetians insisted on selling their grain everywhere, corn except in the official and paying no duty.'49He also tried to persuade the Venetians not to market, importand sell in Constantinoplenonlocal wines for a period of three to five years. His rationalewas that the Empire was already verypoor, and, since Greek wines would not compete in price with the Venetian imports,the wine industry would be ruined: vinum de Cotrono,de Turpia, et aliud vinum grossum, quod in defertur illuc, mortificat tantumvinum quod nasciturin imperio,quod vinum
op. x' Chrysostomides, cit.,315 note 104a and 326. 125ff. 146 Ibid., II, no. 49 (1362); and Chrysostomides, cit.,no. 1 (1341). op.

148 Thomas, Diplomatarium, I,

149Ibid., II, nos. 53 (1363), 89 (1370); Chrysostomides, cit.,no. 11 (1369). op.

216

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

ipsum non potesttolerareexpensas laborerijvinearum,ex quo, nisi per dominade tionemvestram gratia subveniatur dicto imperio,in brevissimo spatio temporis tantumad vinumde ad nihilumest deductum; Greciet omnesalij concurrunt quia quo est melius forum.When the Venetians did not agree, John V unilaterally and this so angered the Veneforbadethe importof wine into Constantinople, ThesfromConstantinople, tians that they consideredremovingtheirmerchants The argumentthen turnedon the retail and the rest of the Empire.150 salonica, and the numberof taverns the Venetians were sale of wines in Constantinople, allowed to keep. This is not particularly interesting, except insofaras it illumibound nates Byzantine policy with regard to retail traders-a policy intimately with the rightsof the fisc.JohnV triedto forbidthe sale by Venetiansof all up in merchandisein retail in Constantinople 1359. This was, of course, hardly a realisticdemand and was not in fact accepted. On the otherhand, the Venetians because the sale of reduced the numberof taverns they had in Constantinople, wine there much decreased the imperial revenues. In 1361, Venice, duty-free and wine made Greek tavernsuncompetitive agreeingthat the sale of duty-free reducedimperialrevenues,decided to tax its own wine.'51 The last economic measures taken by a Byzantine emperor(Manuel II) had to do with wine sales by Venetiansand had no significance except that of a desto perate effort produce some revenuesfor the Emperor. By this time, the Byin zantine state was in no positionto offer anything economictermseitherto the Italians or to its own merchantswho had, in fact, desertedit, as the words of which had declined to Manuel II indicate: "Our revenuesfromthe commercium, almost nothingbecause of bad conditionsand wars, are totally destroyedand because the Venetiansand the VenetianJewsexport are worthnothing, primarily of the merchandise our Greeks,Turks, and othersubjects as if it were Venetian and thus defraudour fisc" (1418).152 merchandise, describesthe end of a process: the Byzantineeconomy This sad littlestatement in market of the Eastern Mediterranean the had firstenteredthe international thirteenth centurywhen this marketwas being developed. The Byzantinesparin the economyof exchange.Some made moneyout of it, but they did ticipated not controlit; theireconomicactivitieswere secondaryand tied to the dominant Italian merchant capital. Having abdicated most of its rightto regulateeconomic life,the Byzantine state lost controland revenues.And the Byzantine economy were of the Palaeologan period,even when the activitiesof Byzantinemerchants
op. op. pp. 323-24; cf. Chrysostomides, cit.,nos. 13, 14; and Miklosichand Muiller, cit.,III, 136-38. 151 op. Chrysostomides, cit.,nos. 6 and 7; cf.Thomas, op. cit.,I, no. 141 (1344); II, no. 53 (1364); Miklosich and Milller,op. cit.,III, 146 (1406) and 137 (1390). 152Chrysostomides, cit.,no. 19: "comerchia que proptermales conditioneset guerrasad nichilussunt op. vestroet reductain totumdestruuntur nichilvalent maxime quia nostriVeneti et subditi Judeimercationes exinde datia et comerclum Venetorum Turchorumet subditorum, rum Grecorum, expediuntpro mercimoniis (almost et fraudantur cetera." [The pronounsare reversed,since this is a Venetianreplyto Manuel, referring verbatim)to his arguments.]The hostilitiesin 1432 betweenthe Genoese of Pera and JohnVIII, caused in and the Emperor seems to have of part by a dispute over the commercium Pera, were a very limitedaffair, been pacifiedby a giftof 1,000 gold coins: Chalcocondyles,op. cit.(supra,note 111), II, 57-62; and P. Schreiin ner, "Venezianer und Genuesen wahrendder erstenHilfte des 15. Jahrhunderts Konstantinopel(14321434)," Studi Veneziani,12 (1970), 357ff. Thomas, op. cit., II, 84 (1362); Thiriet,Dilibdrations(supra, note 5), I, no. 698 (1363), and full text, s150

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

217

most numerous,was a no-exit economy: for its structure was one which led to stagnation.One man who saw this clearlywas CardinalBessarion;livingin Rome, a fact of significance, gave advice for the recoveryof the economyand the he state: he advocated economicprotectionism, with controlsof the exportof neand metallurgical cessities; he advised the import of manufacturing techniques fromthe West and the exploitationof native resources the Greeksthemselves. by But he was writing 1444 (or 1446), and it was much too late: Byzantiumhad in functionedfor so long as a hinterlandto the Italian-dominatedmarketsthat therewas no class to carryout such policies,even if the Ottomanshad not been at the gates of Constantinople. Harvard University and DumbartonOaks

ADDENDUM
Sincethe articleabove appearedin its first form a paperpresented theNew EnglandMedieval to (as in October1977), and even since it was acceptedforpublication, research other Association, the of as has progressed new scholars, well as myownwork, or-much more further, uncovering information new into the phenomena discussedin the article.Some new data, interesting rarely-offering insights in themselves not addingmuchto the arguments but developedabove, help to elucidatethe relations betweenVenetiansand Byzantinesin the first halfof the fourteenth it century: is now possibleto discoverand identify more individualswho were in some way involvedwith the Venetians,either tradeor through financial transactions. of through of Also,theimportance themerchants Monemvasia couldand shouldhavebeenfurther elaborated of communities uponinthearticle;and theexistence three of Monemvasiots, Pegai, Thrace,and Constantinople, active in trade at least in the fourteenth in all should have been discussedat greaterlength.2 century, would not However,the generalargument have been affected thesechanges. by With regardto the secondhalfof the fourteenth and the verybeginning the fifteenth, of century, two main sourcesallowedus to discover existence the and drawa collective of portrait the Byzantine merchantclass: Genoese notarial sources,and Byzantinepatriarchaldocuments.Here, additional information whichhas been recently collected studieddoes make a difference. or In his meticulous researchin the GenoeseState Archives, Balard discovered new register M. a of the notaryAntoniodi Ponz6, whichcomplements alreadypublished the register.3Here, the presence of Greeks, both from ByzantineEmpireand from littoral the Black Sea, is verysignificant; the the of thisregister someoftheir activities whichwerenot so clearly shownin thepublished highlights source. For one thing, geographic the of theirorigins enlarged:thereare Greeksnot onlyfrom is sphere Conbut also from Aenosand Simisso.The latteraresailors, whoare seento engagein a contract stantinople ofexchange betweenChiliaand Simisso.4 the of Secondly, vast majority the Greeks who appearin this 1 Miklosich-Miiller, Acta, III, p. 107 (1332), 102-103 (1324); Ch. Verlinden,L'esclavage dans l'Europe II mddidvale, (Ghent, 1977),573; A.S.V., Notai di Candia,b. 11 (notary Antonio fol. Bresciano), 3r,and fol.5v(1350).I haveprepared edition and commentary theConstantinopolitan ofthis an of on acts notary. 2 See G. Bertolotto, "Nuova seriedi documenti sulle relazionidi Genovacoll'impero Atti bizantino,"

in archives beengreatly has My ownresearch theGenoese of helpedby therecent publications M. Balard and thoseofGianGiacomo Musso.I should liketo thankProfessors Mussoand Geo Pistarino wellas the as Director the Genoese of Dr. for Archives, AldoAgosto, their kindness advice.Mytripsto Genoawere and madepossible a generous of by to grant theGuggenheim I express gratitude. Foundation; thatinstitution my ' A.S.G., Notai Ignoti, b. 18, fols. 43v-44r,44r-v

della Societc4 Ligure di Storia Patria, 28 (1897), 511-45; Tafel-Thomas, Urkunden, III, 180ff;V. Laurent, des fasc. IV, Les regestes 1208 & 1309,nos. 1493, 1520. Regestes actesdu Patriarcatde Constantinople, de 3 M. Balard,"Notessurles portsdu Bas-Danubeau XIVe siecle,"Sikdost. 38 Forschungen, (1979),1-12.

218

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

or mediumor sourceare owners, part-owners, captainsofships;and theshipsare lignade orlo, pamfila, in thisarea.5MostoftheGreekshipssail to Pera, or to Constancommon sized boats whichwerefairly It it tinople,and when theircargo is mentioned, is almost always grain,as mightbe expected.6 is The also to Constantinople.7 captainsor ownersof the to usuallytransported Pera, but occasionally The mostcommon shipsalso engagein businesson theirown account;again,not an unusualsituation. whichsums loaned in sommiof silverare here are exchangecontracts documented transactions by of of Mamali,whomwe have payablein gold hyperpyra Pera.8One of thesepatroni boats, Constancius is and Vassilikos, hereseen to buy withFrangopoulos in transactions alreadyfoundengaging financial of Pera, 60 modiiof grain; the measureused is the Coninhabitant Theodoreof Caffa, a from certain that the grainwas to be transported modius,not the Perote one; probablymeaning stantinopolitan to Constantinople.9 the the thisregister The added information concerning positionof supports argument gainedfrom Black Sea tradein the 1360s:theywereveryactive,especially-thoughnot only-as in theGreeks the and weredetermined circumscribed thoseof the Genoese.10 However,an but theiractivities by sailors, of made here.It is that the economicactivities the Greeksand the be usefully additionalpointmay interests wereopposed,the actual situation theirlong-term Genoesewereso enmeshedthat,although boats co-owned a Greekand to them.Thus,it is notinfrequent find between was one ofcooperation by TheodoreEugenikos(Vighide of the co-owners a lignum orlo, a Genoese." In one extraordinary case, of nico) and Jacopo Sparano of Gaeta, fearful hostileTurks and of Dobrotica,used theirGenoese The boat to a Genoeseman.12 samepoint(ofGreek-Geneose sale a fictitious oftheir to contacts engineer who are settledand thefactthatthereare,in Chilia,at least some Greeks is by coexistence) suggested live here.13 the above concerns exportofByzantine madein myarticle argument Perhapsthemostcontroversial that these exportsessentially I had originally stopped afterthe wheat in WesternEurope. thought State and itseconomy. oftheByzantine secondcivilwarand theconsequent of conclusion the disruption However,the Genoese archivessuggestthat exportsof wheat fromlands eitherstill Byzantineor and and even into the fifteenth, in continued the late fourteenth century, Byzantineuntilrecently the grainwas transported Byzantinesor on Byzantineships. This grainis somethat sometimes by Turkishgrainor from from de grainwhich timesdescribedas granum Romania and is distinguished the the came from areas bordering northern and whichtherefore in Caffa, partofthe Black was loaded of relativeto theimports grainto Genoa in December1388-November Sea. Indeed,some information the is of that 36 percent the grainwhoseprovenence knowncomesfrom "Romania," and 1389,shows and wherewas thisgrainofRomaniaproduced, arisehere:first, Two Caffa.14 questions 30 percent from it? from The first who werethe people involvedin its exportand profiting questionmay be secondly, and Pera willnot the by partlyanswered examining portsin whichgrainwas loaded forexport.Caffa Romanie of For ibid.,fols.12r-13r, 30r-v. a description theseships,see M. Balard, La 5 For example, II, 558-59. gdnoise, 6 A.S.G.,Notai Ignoti, 18,fols.12r-v, 28r. b. to madeby theowners transport in is consent sought an agreement their de lignum orloseemto be Greek;
grain to Constantinople:ibid., fol. 12v-13r. 9 Ibid., fol. 28r; cf. Pistarino,Notai, nos. 47, 48. 10See supra, pp. 195-98. of a We b. Spigawhois thepatronus a boat. A.S.G.,NotaiIgnoti, 18,fols.12v-13r. also find manfrom x11 is 12A.S.G., Notai Ignoti, b. 18, fols. 35v-37v,42r-v; cf. Balard, "Notes," passim. 13A.S.G., Notai Ignoti, b. 18, fols. 9r, 3r. di dell'Archivio Stato di 14 G. G. Musso, Navigazione e commercio genovesecon il Levante nei documenti
7 Ibid., fols. 12v-13r. 8 For ibid., fols.

example,

of officers a 30r-v,31r-v,43v-44r.In one case, the entirecrew and most of the

de of suburb Pera(Balard,Romanie 271), a gdnoise, thisJanulli Spiga probably Spigabeing Greek-inhabited a Greek. and Genova (Rome,1975),doc. no. 4 (1384),no. 6 (1390); cf.pp. 144,150ff. his Table A and B. According of imports graininto M. Balard (Romanie 760),about 70% of theknown to information gdnoise, givenby duorum soldorum "Introitus pro or in Romania.Cf.A.S.G.,San Giorgio, in Genoain 1384originated Caffa and of the between grain Caffa sala 37,sc. 26 (1384).For a cleardistinction minagrani," ("Gabellagrani"), 161. 3021,no. 56 (1392).Cf.Musso,Navigazione, Cf.also that of Romania,see A.S.G., Archivio Segreto, r. 1404). Comune, 155,c. 67v(28 February A.S.G.,Antico

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

219

The other sincetheywereGenoesecolonies. be takenintoaccount, portsofladingwereConstantinople,15 and "Lo Porro,"or "Lo Gollo." "Lo Porro"or "Lo Gollo" mustbe the portof Panidos, Mesembreia,le with Panidos as a port was used interchangeably It Thrace.17 apparently Porou, in southwestern where the Genoese loaded Romania grain.For a documentof 1390 says that 2,000 modiiof grain to IV formed part of the apanage granted Andronicus and his son JohnVII by the EmperorJohnV in 1381. The grantand the successionagreement wereguaranteed the Genoese,who by Palaeologus in now and until1399 werein the pleasantsituationof havingthe major Thraciangrainmarkets the as even later,fora Porou and Panidos seem to have functioned grainmarkets hands of theirallies.8s that 270 modiiof grainwereto be loaded thereon a document dated November 1408,mentions 29, bound forGenoa.19 Even in 1444 we finda Greekof Constantinople selling50 modii"granorum ship de Panito," to be delivered Panidos.20 The portsin question,then,are located along the western in and western littoral theBlack Sea, Constantinople of the Thrace.The conclusion proper, Sea ofMarmara seemsto be inescapablethat we are dealingwiththe production Thrace,whichwas exported of from of a number ports,most of themstillin Byzantinehands. Whilethis exportwas interrupted the by blockade and the lengthy siege of Constantinople the Ottomans(1394-1402),exportsresumed by
had to be consigned "in loco de lo Porro seu in partibus Pannidi vel alibi in locis Grecie ad loca solita a navigia honerarividelicet bucha Avis circa seu in Turchia." It will be noted that Selymbria and Panidos

On the second questionsome lightmay be shed by the records the "Massaria" of Caffa, of which show that thiscity,normally greatexportcenterforgrain,was forced 1386,because of a Tatar a in otherBlack Sea ports.But a not blockade,to importits supplies.Some of its grainthencame from inconsiderable was loaded in Constantinople Pera. It was brought Caffaon the cocha and to quantity of JohanesTodischi22 in the navis ofJane de Monojane.This latterpersonage a rather or is intriguing one. His name suggeststhat he belongedto the originally Monemvasiot familyof Demonoiannior Eudaimonoioannes;althoughthe Monemvasiot originmay have been just a memory this time. by Moreimportant, he was the patronus the ship whichcarriedthe wheat to Caffa, ship of the although itself who in thiscase functioned a grainexporter.23 as belongedto the ByzantineEmperor, Some of the Romaniagrainimported into Genoa was also carried shipsownedeither Greeks by by or by Genoesewho werecloselyassociatedwithGreeks.Jane de Draperiiswas an important man of in affairs the late fourteenth The family de Draperiis, of the richest Pera, was conin century. among nectedto the Byzantines. was called Jhera(Kyra) Paleologina,and was the daughter Jane's mother of a Calojane Livadari; she was Greek,rich (havinghad a dowryof 2500 hyperpyra), perhaps and connected theimperial to as Her husbandLuchino,as wellas herson Jane, family, thenamesuggests. was involvedin the graintrade and in most otherimportant affairs the colonyof Pera; and both of had economicconnections withthe Emperor 1389 and later.24 in
grani," 1384, 2r, 3r-v LeMesembreia: A.S.G., "Gabella grani," 1384, fol. 3r; Selymbria,ibid., fol. 18v,24r; cf. Musso, op. cit., CatherineAsdracha, La rdgion des Rhodopesaux XIIIe et XIVe siUcles;6tudede gdographie historique (Paris, 1976), 43. 18Musso, Navigazione, doc. no. 5, and p. 49; J. Barker, Manuel II Palaeologus, 1391-1425; A Study in Late ByzantineStatesmanship (New Brunswick,1969), 35ff.
17

later.21

15s Musso,Navigazione, no. 6; doc.

A.S.G., Caffe Massaria,1386,362v (grainsent to Caffa);"Gabella

Table 2.

This information comes fromthe Genoese notary B. de Ferrariis. I owe it to the kindnessof Doctor Ausilia Roccatagliata, who allowed me to see the manuscriptof her editionof various 15th-century Genoese notaries of the Levant. 21 Musso, Navigazione,p. 159 and table C (1404); ibid., p. 149 (1404). 22 A.S.G., CaffeMassaria, 1386, fol. 362v. 23 Ibid., fols. 360r,360v,414v. On de Monojane, cf. also V. Gjuzelev, "Du commerceg6noisdans les terres bulgares durantle XIVe siecle," BulgarianHistoricalReview(1979), 36-58. The emperoris not named. Since the grainwas loaded in Constantinopleor Pera, he may have been JohnV, or JohnVII. 24 Balard, Romanie gdnoise,320 and 342, misreads the name of Palaeologina's fatheras "Linodari." The Livadarioi werea well-known aristocraticfamilyof the Palaeologan period. See A.S.G., Notary Donato di Chiavari, 1389, nos. 21, 24, 10, 81, 17. Cf. A.S.G., Peire Massaria, 1390 bis, fols. 5r,31v; 1391, 110v,112r-v, 162r.
20

19A.S.G.,NotaioG. Balbi,no. 411.

220

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

amountof grain,both to Finally,a man called ManuelCabasilas transported Genoa a considerable and severalsailors,amongthema in 1384 and again in 1389. In 1384 the grainwas loaded in Aristo, in werepartners its sale. But in 1389,ManuelCabasilas was transporting certainSofianos, apparently He was actingas agentforthe Emperor because in the agreeto Genoa 5421.5mineofimperial grain. the he mentmade in Pera withthe podestd, and Luchinode Draperiisrepresented Emperor.In 1390, still in Genoa, Manuel Cabasilas receivedin the name of the Emperor34 Genoeselibreowed to the of this thatCabasilasundertook tripas therepresentative JohnV, for Emperor grain.J. Barkerthinks to the and in orderto present Emperor'scomplaints the Genoese;thegraindealingswouldthenhave used here-whichwas the is been a subsidiary However,there no doubtfrom documentation activity. I businesswas the graintrade.Furthermore,do not not availableto Barker-that Cabasilas'primary in stated that the Emperor questionwas JohnV. Thereis, in fact,nothing thinkit is ever explicitly at to precludethe hypothesis-nomorethan an hypothesis this point-that Cabasilas was actingas of therepresentative Genoa's ally,JohnVII.25 in activities Pera also. commercial other As M. Balard has remarked, agentshad important imperial Thus a certainLeondarios,who may be DemetriusLascaris Leontaris,close associate of Manuel II, bribedtwo Genoeseofficials.26 was involvedin tradeand probably Two conclusions emergefromthe above. One is that Thrace seems to have exportedgrainin the the one late fourteenth aristocracy something wouldnot have expected.Secondly, Byzantine century, whether and the Emperorhimself, JohnV or JohnVII, wereinvolvedin tradewiththe Genoesein must in At trade in grain.27 a time when the grainstockpiled Constantinople this period,including in to it have been minimal, is interesting findthe Byzantine upperclass participating its export.The the from the finalquestion:whether grainthussold came primarily estates,that is, whether imperial at cannotbe answered thispoint. theirown production, commercialized ByzantineEmperors of the For the late fourteenth century registers the "Massaria" of Pera and Caffaprovidea great of about the Greekpopulation thosecoloniesas well as of the townsof the Black deal of information of artisans variouskinds:caulkers, as of Sea coasts.Amongthe Greeks Pera we find, maybe expected, sailors.28 a a masterbuilders, vendor,a butcher, mastermillers, shipbuilders, baker,a fisherman, fruit the Greekpopulation: betweenthe rulingGenoeseand There are otherswho serveas intermediaries who drewup Greek of suburbs Pera, a fewnotaries for theseare thetax-collectors the Greek-inhabited Greeksmannedthe ships whichsailed in the Black Sea: GreeksfromConacts, and interpreters.29 sailed as crewon Greek Simisso,Trebizond, Thessaloniki, Sinopi,Kerasous,and Todoro30 stantinople, of or Genoeseships. Some even reachedGenoa, wheretheymade up a considerable proportion the the sailorsfrom Levant.31
758, and the sourceshe mentions.Cf. in particular"Gabella 25On Cabasilas, see Balard, Romaniegdnoise, rationaliumr. 100, fols. 61r-v.Cf. Notai grani," 1384, 8r, 41v, 58v, 83r,and Antico Comune, Magistrorum documentpublishedby J. Barker ("John VII in Genoa: Ignoti C(1389-91), act of October 14, 1390. The first A Problem in Late Byzantine Source Confusion,"OCP, 28 [1962], 236-237) in fact formsthe sequence to this norBarker's second documentmay be used as indications the documentsmentionedabove. Thus, neither

assertion. to ofJohn VII's voyageto Italy,contrary Barker's

28 A.S.G., Peire Massaria, 1390 bis, fols. 59v,60v,90r,2r,41v, 26v,30r; 1391, 4r, 54r,69v,72r; 1390, 112V, 34v,37v, 171v,109v,153v. 29One of the Greeknotariesis Jane de Vrana: Peire Massaria, 1390 bis, 48r,186v.One ofthe tax collectors 402. On Greeknotariesand interis Andrea Vasilico: Peire Massaria, 1390,38v,and Balard, Romaniegdnoise, preters,cf. also A.S.G., Notary Donato di Chiavari, 1389, no. 23. 30 A. Agosto, "Due lettereinedite sugli eventi del Cembalo e di Sorcati in Crimea nel 1434," Atti della SocietdLigure di Storia Patria, n.s., 17 (1978), 509-17. 31 Peire Massaria, 1390, 112v; CaffeMassaria, 1386, 623r, 624r, 625r, 626r, 627v, 628v-629r,360v, 364v; 1410, 19r; Balard, Romanie gdnoise, 881; Musso, Navigazione, 188-93. A.S.G., "Gabella grani," 1384,

clients. as withtheGenoese important in substantial was trade, grain Emperor involved a fairly Byzantine

758. 21A.S.G., Peire Sindicamenta,reg. 1, 1402, fols. 60v-70r;Balard, Romaniegdnoise, 2 Cf. supra, pp. 183-84. A Genoese sea captain planned to load in Caffa300-400 modii of grain "domini (A.S.G., Not. Oneglia Lanfranco,f. 1, no. 148). It is thus clear that the ImperatorisConstantinopolitani"

in of Manuel areaswerealso active.In 1403, other from sailors Calogeniti Ainosarrived Crete Byzantine 10r. concernants Ainos:N. Iorga,"Documents from before he on hisgriparia: had beento Thessalonica sailing
de d'Orient tir6sdes registres notairesde Cr6te," RHSEE, 14 (1937), 90. les Grecs et les affaires

BYZANTINE

ECONOMY IN MEDITERRANEAN

TRADE

221

A AndreasVassilikos, collector of the SeveralGreeksstand out from restof the population. certain because of his name; we knowthat a of a tax paid by the inhabitants Lagirio,is remarkable simply ManoliFrangalexi, connections withwesterners.32 of of number Greeks thatnamehad tradeorfinancial And both M. Balard seemsto have done a good deal ofbusinesswiththe Genoeseof Pera.33 a banker, of from the and G. G. Mussohave pointedout that NicolasNotaras,the father Lucas, made a fortune as interesting relations withthe Genoesearistocracy.3 is Genoesepublicdebt,and had financial Just in and Genoesedocuments. whosecareercan be followed both Byzantine loannes Goudelis, whoin 1400is seento have disposedofconsiderable Ioanneswas theson ofa George funds: Goudelis, in made a loan guaranteed the mostformal in he invested2,600hyperpyra a trading venture, manner, made his moneyworkin variousways; he invested and boughtland as well.35 Ioannes,likehis father, While these activities of in real estate and tradedin the Aegean,accepting capital forinvestment.36 the the shed a newand interesting on are thefamily knownfrom Greeksources, Genoesearchives light and Ioannes certainly werecloselyconnected withthe Genoese.Ioannes, theGoudelis.Georgepossibly et of in or Callojane,was, some point,dominus Patronus a largeship (navisduarumcopertarum) which Pera to Chios.He had important friends the Genoese.Indeed,whenin 1402 an he sailed from among of of was made intothe activities Genoesehighofficials thecolonyofPera, Goudeliswas asked inquiry in treatment his for on to testify a chargeof havingbribedthe treasurers orderto receivepreferential Fromthesame sourcewe learnalso thatGoudelistradedin grain;a tripto "the southern parts" ship.37 he to then in 1401was to Chios,where loaded grainwhichhe brought Constantinople, underOttoman famine The Genoeseofficials priceof 30.5-31 hyperpyra modium. per siege,and sold at the exhorbitant in were accused of havingillegallyparticipated this grainsale. His Genoesepartner was Lodisio de In of the greatPerotefamily.38 sum,thisGreekaristocrat onlyengagedextensively not in Draperiis, He ruthless trade,but did so withthehelpofthe Genoese.He tradedin grainand in wine.39 was fairly in his financial to dealings,as was his father;witnesshis takingadvantageof a famine make money and forhimself forhis Genoesecontacts. somepointsthatdeserve be emphasized The storyofGoudelis illustrates here.For one thing, to when the Greekand Italian sourcesare seen together, theyprovidea vivid pictureof Greektradersand who witheach other financiers werein closeconnection and withtheGenoese.Thus,Janede Monojane, drawnup in Tana, in Greek,by a Greekpriest, who had his testament named as his executors three wereMichaelde Monojaneand Nicola Coresi, latterofChios, bothofthem Greeks:amongthem the but and of inhabitants citizens Constantinople.40 Nicola Coresiis notunknown; was thefather Manuel he of in withGeorgeGoudelis.41 latter-Byzantine The Koresis,traveling partner at least two partnerships memberof the Senate, oikeiosof the Emperor,and investor-was one of two imperial aristocrat, who to owedto theEmperor a grain for which sale,money representatives wereoriginally recover money recovered Cabasilas.Both Goudelisand NicolasNotarasare qualified "Januenwas subsequently as by in ses" by a Genoesenotary 1390.42 ofthemhad almostdailycontacts All withvariousmembers the of is The nameSofiano also interesting thesamereason:PeireMassaria,1390,218r.An loannesVassilico for was amongthe Greeks whoappearedin theregister a Genoese of in "Con notary 1453: A. Roccatagliata., un notaiogenovese Pera e Chionel 1453-1454," tra RESEE, 17 (1979),220. 33E.g., PeireMassaria, 99v,155r-v. 78 1402,54r,119v, , 208v;1391,69 , 68r, 84 Balard,Romanie 347-49;Musso,Navigazione, 243-45. 162, gdnoise, On cf. Acta, 400,546; cf.supra, 199-200. theGoudelis, Barker, 35Miklosich-Miiller, II, 361-66, pp. "John VII," 229-30. 86 Miklosich-Miller, Acta,II, 388,511-12,550-51;cf.supra, p. 201.
37

3s Peire Massaria, 1390, 5r,9v,38v; 1391, 6r,14r,39r,38r; 1390 bis, 77r; 1391, 77r; cf.supra, pp. 197, 204.

758. gdnoise, 38 A.S.G.,Sindicamenta Peire,reg.1, 1402,52r. 39PeireMassaria, 1390bis,5r,31v. Thereis a Godeli whowas one oftwoTurkish ambassadors Perain to 1390: PeireMassaria, 1390bis,31v.It is notclearifthisis thesameperson. September 40 A.S.G.,Notary Donatodi Chiavari, The executors authorized a 1389,nos. 37-38 (February 1390-91). of Genoese Pera to recover Monojane's de in property Tana. 41Supra, pp. 199-200. 42 Barker, "John like VII," 236.Goudelis, NicolasSofianos, Leondaris NicolasNotaras, and were members of the Senatein 1409: V. Laurent, "Le tris6piscopat Patriarche du Matthieu ler,"REB, 30 (1972),134;
Hommesd'aflaires. Oikonomid6s,

A.S.G., Sindicamenta Peire, 1402,reg. 1, 107r,106r,45r-v,51v-52v,71r,95r-111v.Cf.Balard, Romanie

222

ANGELIKI

E. LAIOU-THOMADAKIS

some of whomboughtconsiderable de Draperiisfamily, amountsofgrainin portscontrolled John by VII. The Genoesepoliticalpartyin Constantinople, whose representatives were Andronicus and IV foundation. JohnVII, restedon a solid economic The otherpointwhichthe Goudelisstoryillustrates whichshouldbe stressedis thewealthand and of successwhichsome members this groupenjoyed.It is, therefore, essentialto distinguish between the politicalcollapse of the ByzantineState and the wealthof some of its subjects.43 1453, after In had or leftthe cityto manyGenoesemerchants pettytraders Constantinople fallento the Ottomans, to Chios; amongthemwereGreeks had been closelyconnected withthe Genoese who,by definition, go But theremusthave been thosewho remained Conof Pera; some of these,too, weremerchants." in soon after fall,forin 1476 a groupof obviously its or who returned richGreekscomstantinople, very for threeof the peted unsuccessfully the rightto collectcertaintaxes forthe Ottomangovernment; fourin the groupborefamousnames: thereweretwo Palaeologiand a Chalkokondyles."
43

M. has beenmadeforthe Black Sea area by E. S. Zevakin, L. Pencko, "Ricerche sulla storiadellecolonie nei nel di by genovesi Caucaso occidentale secoliXIII-XV," trans. M. T. Dellacasa in Miscellanea Studi I Storici, (Genoa,1969),95.
of the Kanunname, fondsturc ancien 39, Bibliothbquenationale, Paris," Der Islam, 43 (1967), 153-55.

A much strongerbut similar argument,distinguishing between political and economic dominance,

Hahl Inalcikfor to Translation Professor directing attention his"Noteson N. Beldiceanu's my 45I thank

A. Roccatagliata, "Con un notaio genovese," 224, 225-26, 229.