The Economic History of Byzantium From

Corinth 651

In the last decade of the eleventh century the material culture of the city underwent a revolution best demonstrated by the appearance, quantity, and quality of pottery. Earlier communal shapes such as glazed chafing dishes were replaced by individual glazed bowls and dishes. At the same time, the glaze, formerly used functionally, became standard as part of the decoration of tablewares, in conjunction with a white slip and incised or painted lines. The proportion of glazed wares in pottery assemblages also increased from less than 1% to about 6% of the whole. This revolution suggests a change in eating habits and the general adoption of premium ceramic products that once had been the preserve of richer citizens. The phenomenon extended to lesser provincial cities and rural settlements only about twenty years later. The change perhaps resulted from large-scale manufacture, efficient distribution networks, and the fact that poorer people now had some spare cash to spend. A gradual reduction in the size and value of gold, silver, and, most significantly, copper coins to about one-third of their former value over the course of the mid-eleventh century resulted in a bronze coin of low denomination that could be used as money for petty market and shop transactions. Various economic measures taken in the reign of Alexios I may have further stimulated the evolution of part-time to full-time craft specialization in Corinth, thereby providing a dependent urban market for the agricultural produce of the rural hinterland.16

The strength of Corinth’s economy in the mid-twelfth century led to a piratical attack by the fleet of Roger of Sicily in 1147. Notwithstanding the losses in skilled labor, Roger’s court geographer, Edrisi, was still able to describe the city as “large and flourishing” seven years later in 1154.17 In the late twelfth century, Choniates records that the city had two harbors and that the emporion, prosperous from trade, was below the kastron (usually assumed to be Acrocorinth).18 The fact that the Franks found the lower town fortified with towers and a circuit wall in the early thirteenth century is seldom reported.19 This fortification is perhaps essentially the same as that noted to the east of the forum and may well be that alluded to by Choniates. The change in administration seems not to have affected commerce, and, although Corinth was no longer the seat of regional government, it remained in the hands of the prince of the Morea and acted as an important center for international trade. The appearance of material culture remained essentially unchanged, and the lack of a local Frankish coinage in the early thirteenth century was mitigated by the circulation of the Latin Imitatives and

16G. D. R. Sanders, “Byzantine Glazed Pottery at Corinth to c. 1125: Chronological, Social and Economic Conclusions” (Ph.D. diss., University of Birmingham, 1995). The weight of the copper follis declined to 40% of its former size but, despite fluctuations, the ratio of copper to gold remained constant. Alexios I further reduced the size of the copper coinage. Urkunden zur ¨alteren Handelsund Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig, ed. G. F. L. Tafel and G. M. Thomas, 3 vols. (Vienna, 1856–57), 1:51ff, 96.

17La ge´ographie d’Edrisi, ed. J. A. Jaubert, 2 vols. (Paris, 1936–40), 122–26; Bon, Pe´loponne`se byzantin, 156–58.

18Nicetae Choniatae Historia, ed. J. L. van Dieten (Berlin–New York, 1975), 74.

19The Chronicle of the Morea, ed. J. Schmidt (London, 1904), 74–75; Bouras, “City and Village,” 618.

652 G. D. R. SANDERS

perhaps by the continued use of Manuelan types. The suzerainty of Charles II of Anjou over the Peloponnese strengthened the existing commercial ties with Italy to the extent that a significant proportion of manufactured articles, especially pottery from Apulia and the Veneto, was imported into Corinth.20 The near extinction of Corinth in the fourteenth century can largely be attributed to the Catalan sack in 1312, which was followed by an earthquake ca. 1320 and by the arrival of the Black Death in 1348.

Almost none of the extensive domestic, workshop, and shop quarter in the forum area existed before the very end of the eleventh century. Expansion in the area originally followed the then still extant line of the Roman decumanus, running west along the south side of the South Stoa, from the proposed kastron. This was followed by development into the Roman forum, where the open space was rapidly and drastically reduced by encroaching constructions. The maximum extent in the thirteenth century is that represented in the plans illustrated in Corinth XI and Corinth XVI for the period of the eleventh and twelfth century respectively. This area was excavated sixty years ago, and there is regrettably little that can now be done to elucidate the function of the complexes found there. It is clear from the accumulation of 1.50–2.00 m of occupation deposits between ca. 1050 and 1250 and numerous, now obscure, building phases that activity was intense and civic hygiene somewhat squalid. Some of the narrow (2.5–5 m wide) alleys and part of the central plateia were lined with small, oneto (exceptionally) four-celled shops. Each cell offered no more than 12–15m2 of retail and storage space; these operations, therefore, necessarily had to be small-scale. Some shops opened onto a stoa-like covered frontage.

Behind the shops, domestic and monastic complexes centered on courtyards. The domestic, and plausibly the monastic, areas were also used for craft specialization. A potters’ kiln dating ca. 1100–50 predates the construction of St. John’s monastery in the early thirteenth century.21 The identification of the “Pottery Factory” and the function of several other kilns in the area is questionable, but early twelfth-century preglazing pottery wasters, metal slag and glass furnace lining, cullet and pontil wads found south and westward from the Bema church are evidence for industry. Much of the glass from the Glass Factory itself is now considered to be late thirteenth to early fourteenth century in date. In appearance the glass of this late date has close parallels with western types, and further research is required to ascertain whether it is locally produced or imported.22 A small medieval bathhouse is still preserved southwest of the Bema, and to the east were found remains of winepresses and olive presses. There are also well-known references to silk workers and dyers, while the westernized form of

20C. K. Williams and O. Zervos, “Frankish Corinth, 1992,” Hesperia 62 (1993): 20–21, 31; Sanders, “Assemblage of Frankish Pottery,” 193. Between 30% and 60% of the glazed pottery from the complex south of the museum at Corinth was Italian in origin.

21C. K. Williams and O. Zervos, “Frankish Corinth, 1991,” Hesperia 61 (1992): 164–71, for a recent discussion of St. John’s.

22Williams in C. K. Williams and O. Zervos, “Frankish Corinth, 1992,” 15–33; Cf. V. Franc¸ois and J.-M. Spieser, “Pottery and Glass in Byzantium,” EHB 597.

Corinth 653

the city’s name, Coranto, gave rise to the name of a variety of locally produced small, dried, seedless grapes: currants.

More recent excavations have uncovered an eleventhto early twelfth-century establishment that perhaps engaged in gold and bronzework at the southwest end of the forum. There is, however, no evidence to support the interpretation of one of the larger structures to the north of the smith’s shop as a silk-workers’ lodge. Here a row of four shops fronting the street running south toward Acrocorinth was built in the midtwelfth century. These were each linked by doors in their back wall to a long communal hall running the length of their west side; an earlier bath structure may have remained in use. The whole complex centered on an open courtyard limited on the west side by the West Shops. The second floor of the shops, supported by pilasters and the colonnade of archaic columns (originally the interior colonnade of the temple of Apollo) overhung the street.23

South of the museum, and immediately west of the above area, current work has concentrated on a small monastery north of a later thirteenthto early fourteenthcentury complex based around two courtyards. A line of shops including a pharmacy, identified by the finds of imported and local albarelli (drug jars), a possible bank, associated with several jetons and counterfeit coins, a tavern, with a hearth and windowsill- cum-counter, and a metal workshop separate the large graveled eastern court from a smaller, paved western court. Glass, ceramic, and metal objects found throughout the area show strong links with Italy. A large kitchen on the inner courtyard, the medical, catering, and financial facilities, and the location on the western approach to the city all suggest that the complex was a hospice perhaps associated with the monastery.24

Practically no information exists to indicate the population of Byzantine towns, and the formulas used by various scholars to estimate numbers vary. It is safe to assume that Peloponnesian towns were small even in their heyday. In 1395 Niccolo Martoni described a much reduced Corinth of about forty-five to fifty houses confined to the enceinte on Acrocorinth. Of the deserted lower town he writes, “as the ruins show, it was (once) a large and important place,” though he mistakenly confuses these as ancient rather than recent ruins.25 Estimates of the number of households in the early nineteenth-century settlements of the Peloponnese, provided by Leake and Pouqueville, are informative. These suggest that there was a distinct hierarchy of towns in the Peloponnese, with the largest cities containing a population of about 11,000 (2,500 houses or families) and the lower-ranking towns 5,000 (1,100), 2,500 (560), and about

23H. S. Robinson, “Excavations at Corinth, 1960,” Hesperia 31 (1962): 95–113; C. K. Williams, “Corinth, 1976: Forum Southwest,” Hesperia 46 (1977): 1–39.

24C. K. Williams and O. Zervos, “Excavations at Corinth, 1989: The Temenos of Temple E,” Hesperia 59 (1990): 345–50; eadem, “Corinth, 1990: Southeast Corner of Temenos E,” Hesperia 60 (1991): 19–39; eadem, “Frankish Corinth, 1991,” Hesperia 61 (1992): 134–51; eadem, “Frankish Corinth, 1992,” Hesperia 62 (1993): 3–34; eadem, “Frankish Corinth, 1993,” Hesperia 63 (1994): 1–56.

25J. P. A. van der Vin, Travellers to Greece and Constantinople: Ancient Monuments and Old Traditions in Medieval Travellers’ Tales, 2 vols. (Istanbul, 1980), 615–20.

Numismatic Circulation in Corinth

from 976 to 1204

Vasso Penna

The characterization of Corinth as a “Pompeii” for the study of coin circulation during the Byzantine period is no exaggeration.1 The long-term excavations by the American School of Classical Studies have brought to light some thousands of Byzantine coins, the study of which constitutes a reliable aid to investigating not only the city’s economic status but also trends in Byzantine monetary circulation in a region distant from Constantinople.2

The main feature of coin circulation in the city in the period from 970 to 1092 is the regularity of the upward trend, which had been gradually formed since the second quarter of the ninth century. In the excavation seasons 1896–1929, the numismatic material of which is published in adequate detail, 816 coins covering the period from 830 to 970 were found, whereas from the phase that concerns us here 2,180 coins are recorded; there is thus almost a threefold increase in the number of coins lost annually (Fig. 1). This upward trend is particularly important for Corinth when one recalls that the period is characterized by widespread recovery in the circulation of bronze coinage in the Peloponnese, presumably implying a redistribution of the productive forces, the transit centers, and the travel routes.3 This redistribution does not seem to have negatively affected the prosperity of Corinth.

The rate of annual loss of the anonymous class A (970–1030/35) is proportionately

1D. M. Metcalf, “Corinth in the Ninth Century: The Numismatic Evidence,” Hesperia 42 (1973): 181.

2The present study is based on the material from Corinth published to date. K. M. Edwards, “Byzantine Coins,” in Coins, 1896–1929, Corinth VI (Cambridge, Mass., 1933), 138–47. K. M. Edwards, “Report on the Coins Found in the Excavations at Corinth during the Years 1930–1935,” Hesperia 6 (1937), 250, 255; J. Harris, “Coins Found at Corinth, 1936–1939,” Hesperia 10 (1941): 146, 153, and fig. 1. For the excavation periods from 1970 onward, see the relevant reports in the following volumes of Hesperia: 40 (1971): 47–50; 41 (1972): 184; 42 (1973): 44; 43 (1974): 75–76; 44 (1975): 48–50; 45 (1976): 160–61; 49 (1980): 27–28; 51 (1982): 159; 52 (1983): 43–44; 53 (1984): 119–20, 246–49; 54 (1985): 94–95; 55 (1986): 173–74, 200–202; 56 (1987): 42–43, 138–48; 57 (1988): 140–41; 58 (1989): 46–47; 59 (1990): 364–65; 60 (1991): 49–50; 61 (1992): 184–85; 62 (1993): 43–44; 63 (1994): 48–49; 64 (1995): 49–51.

3D. M. Metcalf, Coinage in South-Eastern Europe, 820–1396 (London, 1979), 71–73.

656 VASSO PENNA

much smaller than of the other bronze issues of the period (1030/35–1092; Fig. 2). It has been noted, on the basis of the evidence of stray finds as well as of hoards, that the coins circulating in Corinth were mainly certain of the fifty or so varieties of Class A. In the past this has been interpreted as indicative of the existence of a local mint responsible for these issues,4 but recent research, based on the geographical distribution of these varieties, has shown this suggestion to be rather improbable. On the contrary, it has been proposed that the specific varieties found at Corinth represent the earliest issues of this class.5 This of course implies that the anomaly in the monetary activities of Corinth in the first quarter of the eleventh century was due to certain unexpected circumstances that arose at a particular moment. The historical events of the period, in which the Byzantine-Bulgar wars in the Balkans played a leading role, presumably had a negative influence on the pace of commercial activity in the city and possibly on its monetary support by the central authority.6

Another interesting peculiarity in the coin circulation in Corinth is the absence, both in hoards and in stray finds, of gold issues, histamena or tetartera, as well as of silver miliaresia.7 The only exceptions are an hyperpyron of Constantine X,8 a miliaresion of Michael VII,9 and the small hoard of five miliaresia of Basil II, covering the period 989–1035 and found at the port of Kenchreai.10 Given that our information on the circulation of miliaresia within the boundaries of the Byzantine Empire is limited, the find constitutes an interesting case. The circumstances of its concealment are difficult to determine, but whether it is the lost purse of a foreign traveler or the profit from a specific commercial transaction, it is undoubtedly an important testimony of activities in the harbor of Kenchreai.

The year 1092 is a turning point in the history of Byzantine coinage. The monetary reform of Alexios I placed the Byzantine monetary system on a new base, adapting it to the demands of the age.11 The number of published coins of this period from Corinth is

4D. M. Metcalf, “Interpretation of the Byzantine ‘Rex Regnantium’ Folles of Class A, c. 970–1030,” NC (1970): 199–219.

5V. Athanassopoulou-Pennas, “Byzantine Monetary Affairs during the 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th Centuries” (D. Phil., Oxford University, 1990), c. 881, 3–4, 231–47; see also V. Ivanisevic, “Interpretation and Dating of the Folles of Basil II and Constantine VII: The Class A2,” ZRVI 27–28 (1989): 19–42.

6The statistical tables for Athens present a similar picture. Moreover, of a total of 297 coins of this period from excavations at Sparta, Class A is represented by 89 pieces, i.e., 30%.

7The lack of histamena and gold tetartera from Corinth is consistent with the extremely limited, indeed, virtually nonexistent, circulation of noble metal coins in southern and northern mainland Greece during this period. Hoards with histamena of this period are mentioned from Crete (Ayies Paraskies, 1962); see S. Alexiou, A 18.B2 (1963): 313–14; from Chryse (Edessa), see N. Oikonomides, “ QhsauroJ´ "∆ crusw´ n nomisma´ twn apo´ th Crush´ Ede´ ssh" (10o" aiw´ na"),” in Eufro´ sunonÚ Afie´ rwma ston Mano´ lh Catzhda´ kh (Athens, 1992), 435–38; and from Samos (Tigani, 1914).

8Edwards, “Byzantine Coins,” 140, no. 109.

9J. D. MacIsaac, “Corinth: Coins, 1925–1926,” Hesperia 56 (1987): 138, no. 655.

10R. L. Hohlfelder, Kenchreai Eastern Port of Corinth, vol. 3, The Coins (Leiden, 1978), 76, nos. 1173–79.

11C. Morrisson, “La Logarike´: Re´forme mone´taire et re´forme fiscale sous Alexis Ier Comne`ne,”

TM 7 (1979): 419–64; reprinted in eadem, Monnaie et finances `a Byzance: Analyses, techniques (Aldershot, 1994), art. 6.

impressively large. Comparison of coin circulation in Corinth in the twelfth century with that in the eleventh is difficult because the entire structure of the monetary system had changed. However, it is indicative that annual losses in the twelfth century were of the same order as in the eleventh. The highest rate of coin loss is apparent in the reign of Manuel I. This might be due partly to the Norman pillage in 114712 and partly to an increasing commercial activity. The high loss rate for coins of Andronikos I was perhaps affected by the political instability and the anomalous circumstances of the emperor’s ascent to the throne. This also indicates a continuous flow of currency in Corinth.

The rate of discovered gold hyperpyra or even electrum trachea is minimal. The gold finds are limited to four hyperpyra of Alexios I,13 two of which possibly constitute a small hoard,14 and a hoard of thirty hyperpyra of Manuel I.15 To these exceptions can be added an hyperpyron of Alexios I, part of some travel hoard—together with 119 deniers Clermont and 1 denier le Puy—lost around 1098.16 This hoard, together with a second find containing six anonymous folles of the preceding period along with sixty-five bronze issues of the Seljuks of Syria, and concealed around 1100,17 cannot be considered as representing local transactions. They do, however, reveal that in the early twelfth century Corinth continued to be a crossroads for travelers; it was here, sometime in the mid-twelfth century, that a pilgrim en route to the Holy Land lost his purse containing nine coins from Valence and five from Lucca.18

It is true that the lack of noble-metal coins could be due to the fact that people were more careful with these denominations and consequently the number of their accidental losses was lower. However, the lack of noble-metal coins in Corinth, a phenomenon localized to the whole of the southern Greek mainland,19 in connection with the lack of savings hoards consisting of gold issues or of electrum trachea, as well as the minimal presence of billon trachea, hints at some local peculiarities as regards the trends of the current circulation of coins. The abundance in which tetartera and half tetartera are found in Corinth, either as stray finds or as hoards, leads to the same conclusion. These small denominations were virtually the only coins in circulation in the Corinthian market.

The historical evidence for the twelfth century seemingly contradicts these remarks. Corinth, Thebes, and Sparta are mentioned as considerable export centers for various commodities, including silk. The tetartera, although numerous, hardly reflect the in-

12Some small coin hoards could have been also inadvertently included in the cataloguing of isolated finds.

13Edwards, “Byzantine Coins,” 141, no. 116.

14Metcalf, Coinage in South-Eastern Europe, 108 and n. 19.

15See J. Harris, “A Gold Hoard from Corinth,” AJA 43 (1939): 268–77; M. Hendy, Coinage and Money in the Byzantine Empire, 1081–1261 (Washington, D.C., 1969), 99 and n. 6.

16Edwards, “Byzantine Coins.”

17Metcalf, Coinage in South-Eastern Europe, 99–100 and n. 7.

18Edwards, “Byzantine Coins”; see also Metcalf, Coinage in South-Eastern Europe, 99 and n. 6.

19For gold finds in mainland Greece, generally, see I. Touratsoglou, “ QhsauroJ´ "∆ ajsprwn trace´ wn/ 1983 apo´ thn Arta,J” A 36 (1981), Mele´ te" (Athens, 1989), 217 and esp. n. 22.

658 VASSO PENNA

formation in the sources concerning the region’s flourishing economy. For the moment, we can speculate that trade and the management of monetary affairs were in the hands of the upper class, of foreign merchants, and of commercial agents and that the small coin issues probably represented a token currency established for practical reasons to facilitate trading transactions and mass payments. It is difficult to determine the factors that contributed to the dominance of this peculiar regime in the specific region and to the differentiation of the circulation of money here from that in other urban centers of the empire. These should obviously be sought in local social and economic structures.

The dearth of evidence on the permanent population of Corinth, on the standard of living of its inhabitants, their occupations, the size and nature of productive enterprises, on labor and social relations between the workforce and the ruling class, leaves a series of questions unanswered. In the context of this study, the crucial issue is to what extent the dominance of the tetartera and the half tetartera as token money in the region was imposed by the current demands of monetary circulation at the level of everyday transactions. The numismatic, archaeological, and historical data in this question are, unfortunately, fragmentary. I mention indicatively that during the reign of Theophilos, when a drastic revival in the circulation of copper coinage is observed in Corinth, folles of two specific stylistic groups circulated almost exclusively in the region.20 The weight range of these issues was at lower levels than that of other groups, totally absent from the region.21 In addition, the savings hoards of copper coins of the eleventh and twelfth centuries,22 which are attested at Corinth, also reflect the habits of a society made up not of wealthy landowners, but of industrious individual citizens, who succeeded in creating family businesses and cottage industries in this rather barren and mountainous land. From this patchy evidence, the question arises whether the numismatic peculiarities analyzed here suggest that the cost of living and consumption in the region were lower than that in others. Further examination of the numismatic evidence is imperative.

20These are groups St and Z ; see Metcalf, “Corinth in the Ninth Century,” and Coinage in SouthEastern Europe, 30, table 1.

21The average weight of the folles of group St ranges between 7.50 and 5.50 g, with the greater concentration of 2%, to 7.50–6.50 g. The average weight of group Z is between 6.50 and 5.50 g, while that of groups A and B is between 8.50 and 7.50 g.

22The composition of these hoards is reminiscent of gold savings hoards from Bulgaria and Dobrugja. I cite indicatively the hoard found at Corinth in 1911/12 and now in the Numismatic Museum of Athens (inv. no. 1911/12, Nb/a), which includes folles of Leo VI, Romanos I, anonymous issues of the 11th century, and tetartera of John II. The hoard discovered in 1937 is of similar composition and includes issues from the reign of Basil I, Leo VI, anonymous issues, and tetartera of Alexios I, John II, and Manuel I. See Harris, “Coins Found at Corinth,” 146.

Kherson and Its Region

Anne Bortoli and Michel Kazanski

Lying on the southwestern coast of the Crimea, Kherson was a Byzantine military and administrative center north of the Black Sea that remained part of the empire until the end of the fourteenth century.1 The town occupied an extremely important defensive position, being an obligatory stopping-off place on the route to the Dnieper estuary, which led to the Pontic steppes and Russia. The sea routes, through the Cimmerian Bosphoros to the Sea of Azov in the east and to the Dneister estuary and Danube delta in the west, also passed near Kherson. Furthermore, the town played a dominant role in the political and economic life of the Crimean peninsula as a whole.

Archaeological excavations have revealed that Kherson’s very regular town plan, inherited from the Hellenistic age, was retained, by and large, during the whole of the Middle Ages (Fig. 1). New public buildings, especially the churches, were inserted within the existing plan. Kherson’s medieval ramparts also tended to follow the line of its ancient fortifications. The necropolis outside the town had occupied the same site, without interruption, since antiquity. In the same way, much of medieval Kherson’s social and economic topography remained unchanged. To the south, the fortress, by then integrated within the town walls, retained its military role (Fig. 1, A). The port and its associated commercial activities persisted throughout the town’s history on the same southeastern site near the fortress (Fig. 1, B). The northeastern quarters contained the principal public buildings, notably large churches and a basilica (known as Uvarov), which may be considered the cathedral. The urban nobility was certainly concentrated in this sector of the town.

This chapter was translated by Sarah Hanbury Tenison.

1 The principal works on the history and archaeology of Byzantine Kherson are N. M. Bogdanova, “Kherson v X–XV vv.: Problemy istorii vizantiiskogo goroda,” in Prichernomor’e v srednie veka (Moscow, 1991), 8–172; A. L. Jakobson, Srednevekovyi Khersones, XII–XIV vv., Materialy i issledovaniia po arkheologii SSSR 17 (Moscow–Leningrad, 1950); A. L. Jakobson, Rannesrednevekovyi Khersones, Materialy i issledovaniia po arkheologii SSSR 63 (Moscow–Leningrad, 1959); A. I. Romanchuk, Khersones VI– pervoi poloviny IX v. (Sverdlovsk, 1976); A. I. Romanchuk, Khersones, XII–XIV vv.: Istoricheskaia topografiia (Krasnoiarsk, 1986); A. L. Jakobson, Keramika i keramicheskoe proizvodstvo srednevekovoi Tavriki

(Leningrad, 1979).