The Economic Prosperity of the East Roman Empire Compared to the West Roman Empire: The Role of Trade and Governance

The economic prosperity of the East Roman Empire, also known as the Byzantine Empire, in comparison to the West Roman Empire, can be attributed to several factors, chief among them being the duration of urbanization, the resilience of its economy, and its strategic location in the trade routes of the Mediterranean. This article explores how the Mediterranean trade, corruption, and governance played a significant role in the economic conditions of the two empires.

The Role of Urbanization and Corruption

One of the key differences between the East Roman and West Roman empires was the level of urbanization. While the West was experiencing significant urban decay, particularly evident during the Crisis of the Third Century, the East was more urbanized. This urbanization supported a more complex economy, which was less affected by the tumultous events that plagued the West. The East Roman Empire had a more resilient and diversified economic structure, which allowed it to withstand the severe challenges of its time.

The administration in the West was plagued by corruption. The tax system was not progressive, and the elite often obtained exemptions, shifting the burden of taxation onto the poor. This heavy taxation contributed to civil unrest and revolts. One notable example is the rebellion of the baugadae, a term used to describe peasants engaged in large-scale agricultural revolts. These revolts were particularly severe in Gaul and Spain, as well as in the Ebro Valley until 475, where the Suebic king Rechiar allied with them.

Historical records also mention corruption among tax collectors, including an edict by Majorian (reigned 457–61) and a letter by Sidonius Apollinaris, a Gallo-Roman bishop, describing a corrupt tax collector named Seronatus in Gaul. This corruption compounded the economic issues in the West, making it difficult for the government to maintain its military strength and secure its territories.

The Strategic Importance of Constantinople

The strategic location of Constantinople on the east-west trade routes from Asia played a crucial role in the economic prosperity of the East Roman Empire. The city was a hub for trade and commerce, which brought in significant revenue and contributed to the economic stability of the empire. During the 6th century, Constantinople became the heart of the silk trade when Nestorian monks smuggled silkworm eggs into the region, initiating a profitable silk trade that further enriched the city and the empire.

In contrast, the economic problems of the West were exacerbated by the loss of North Africa, which made it impossible for the West to maintain a strong military. They began to trade away their territories to the barbarians in return for military service, a stark contrast to the East Roman Empire's self-sufficiency and reliance on trade. The Western Roman army had been significantly weakened by the Battle of the Frigidus River in 394, where 10,000 soldiers from both Eastern and Western armies perished. This led to a greater reliance on unreliable barbarian mercenaries, who often came from tribes the Romans were fighting against.

The Impact of Governance and Military Deficiencies

The governance and military strategies in the West also contributed to its economic decline. Civil wars and the appointment of puppet emperors by barbarian generals, such as Ricimer, undermined the central authority of the Western Roman Empire. The breaking away of the general Aegidius in northern Gaul and the formation of the rump state called the Kingdom of Soissons further fragmented the Western Roman territories.

The loss of North Africa was a major blow, making it impossible for the West to support a strong military. This necessitated trading away territories, which ultimately weakened the empire further. For instance, the rebellion of Bonifacius in Africa, which was supported by the Vandals, led to the loss of North Africa. Similarly, the rebellion of Gerontius in Spain, which allowed the Vandals and Suebi to enter the region, further strained the Western Roman military.

Conclusion

In summary, the economic prosperity of the East Roman Empire can be attributed to its more advanced urbanization, resilience, and strategic location on the trade routes of the Mediterranean. In contrast, the West Roman Empire was hampered by internal corruption, military deficiencies, and the loss of key territories. The Mediterranean trade route played a significant role in enriching the East Roman Empire, whereas the West suffered from a combination of these issues, ultimately leading to its economic decline.

Keywords: East Roman Empire, Mediterranean trade, economic prosperity