The Socio-Economic Impact of Raiding on the Eastern and Balkan Borderlands of the Eastern Roman Empire, 502 – 602

Abstract This paper compares the socio-economic impact of warfare on two frontier zones of the sixth-century eastern Roman empire: the central and northern Balkans; and the northern Syrian-Mesopotamian and Armenian borderlands in the East. The theme of war damage is central to historical and archaeological work on the Balkans but plays a comparatively marginal role in research on the East. And yet the eastern provinces were affected by more intensive raiding by larger armies, and at least as regularly as the Balkans. Much of the difference in perception is related to contemporary sources’ exaggerated coverage of ‘barbarian’ raiding on the Balkans, a region traditionally viewed as a neglected backwater by authors such as Procopius. Conversely, such sources portray warfare with the Sassanid Persians in the East through a ‘classicising’ lens, describing at greater length generals’ speeches, battles, campaigns and sieges. Another reason for the disparity in modern discussions of the two regions is the socio-economic recession in the northern Balkans toward the end of the sixth century. This can be at least indirectly linked to the effects of warfare between the empire and the Avar Khaganate and Slavic groups. Recovery from the devastation caused by these groups’ invasions could no longer be funded by the imperial authorities, who, by this stage, were struggling to finance wars on multiple fronts and were feeling the fiscal effects of repeated bouts of bubonic plague. Despite also suffering from this absence of central investment, eastern societies and economies enjoyed a greater degree of continuity in the final decades of the sixth century. This was because non-imperial sources of agricultural and commercial wealth in these areas encouraged elites to invest in recovery projects. Local elites’ and wider populations’ deep-rooted feelings of cultural, linguistic and religious attachment also played a role in their survival. These economic and cultural ties can in part be explained by the fact that, unlike the Balkans, these eastern provinces had enjoyed a long period of peace and stability in the fourth and fifth centuries.