Sources of Crisis in the Byzantine Empire

The Macedonian dynasty (867-1056) witnessed the restoration of the power of the Byzantine Empire. This dynasty produced several prominent emperors, including Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus (905-956), known primarily as a scholar and writer, author of works on state administration, and outstanding military figures: Nicephorus Phocas (963-969), Joannes Tzimiskes (969-976), and especially Vasilius II of Bulgaria (976-1025).

Taking advantage of the division of the Arab Empire, the empire moved eastward, recapturing the islands of Crete and Cyprus, as well as much of Syria and its most important city, key to the whole land, Antioch.

In Italy, the provinces of Apulia and Sicily were retaken, and a very bloody, protracted and costly war finally solved the pressing problem of controlling the Balkan Peninsula, the gateway to the imperial capital.

For many centuries, the greatest danger of Slavic invasion, especially of the Bulgarians, threatened from there. However, in the early 11th century it was possible to destroy the Bulgarian state and absorb its lands, and to establish the borders of the empire as far as the Danube River, an ancient natural barrier and boundary of the Roman Empire. In the northwest, the border reached the coast of the Adriatic Sea; Byzantium also made Serbia dependent.

The internal situation of the empire was no less prosperous. When in the East and West there was a decline in civilization, a return to subsistence farming and de-urbanization, it was not affected. On the contrary, cities continued to grow, the agrarian economy was at a very high level, still based on monetary rents; science and culture flourished as never before.

Cities, especially Constantinople, became the most important trading centers of the world, concentrating all major trade routes and extracting huge wealth from intermediation. The finances of the state were still based on the monetary system, and feudal tendencies were not evident in the ruling class.

The state administration remained very efficient and highly centralized. The power of the emperors was very strong due to a solid economic and administrative foundation.

However, this was only an impressive facade. Underneath it, in every sphere of life, there were very deep problems, so dangerous that even every single problem could lead to the fall of the empire.

The scale of the problem was becoming threatening. Neither administrative prohibitions nor an increase in the apparatus of control over the peasantry could prevent it. This apparatus consisted of a huge army of tax collectors, purely police officers and local administration officials, paid, after all, from the taxes paid by the peasantry.

The same thing was happening in the central institutions. No state was as bureaucratic as Byzantium, and none had so many bureaucrats. The situation resembled a vicious circle: the state responded to the decrease in tax revenues by increasing taxes on the peasants who could still pay them, and collecting them with more and more collectors.

No wonder that most of these taxes, in fact all of them, were eaten up just to pay for the work of the state administration! If we add to this the enormous corruption of officials and the huge costs of representation in court, it is easy to conclude that the state was living on the verge of financial collapse, especially since there were other reasons effectively undermining the country's economic potential.

The most important of these was the frankly incredible growth of religious institutions. Although the Byzantine Empire was not a theocracy, the religious factor permeated every aspect of its life.

Imperial power was marked by the halo of divinity, and the state itself regarded the spread of the Christian faith on earth as the raison d'etre of its existence. It was the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth, an apostle of faith who saw his main task in spreading Christianity through the development of his empire.

Equally important was the attention to purity of faith in the empire. The spirit of orthodoxy had left its mark on the whole empire. Woe to schismatics and heretics - the fight against them was even more important than the fight against infidels. Not surprisingly, church administration was an integral part of the Byzantine bureaucratic machine. It was also its most important part.

To cope with so many responsibilities (including external ones, for the empire contributed much to missionary activity) and to keep watch over the spiritual life of its fellow citizens, it had to be numerous and powerful.

Not surprisingly, it had almost a third of the land under its sovereignty - of course, without the right to pay taxes to the state - and this territory continued to grow! At the same time, the number of taxpaying peasants was decreasing.

Orthodox monasticism has never been subject to such discipline as the strictly regulated monastic congregations of Latin Christianity. It has always remained a voluntary association of people striving first and foremost for their own salvation.

All attempts to impose dependence on them, even on the ecclesiastical authorities, failed. On the other hand, it was extremely orthodox in its ideology, opposed to any change and, thanks to its numbers, played an important role in shaping public opinion.