56 ECONOMIC LIFE OF THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE
holdings were protected by the central Government, the
causes which led at first to the development of the system
of small holdings and later to the disappearance of that
system are much less clear. The struggle against the landed
aristocracy undertaken by the Macedonian dynasty, and
before them by certain other Emperors, is generally ex-
plained by reference to military, political, and fiscal con-
siderations. If the 'military lands' were swallowed up in the
large private estates, then the Empire would be compelled
to maintain an army of mercenaries which would prove both
costly and unreliable.
The great landed proprietors, who had become veritable
'feudal' barons, frequently rebelled and occasionally claimed
the imperial throne. It was important to prevent the growth
of their power, while the East Roman State found that it was
much easier to collect from small holders than from large
landowners the various taxes and the numberless contribu-
tions in kind.
To these reasons one must add another, which the
materialistic interpretation of history too often overlooks,
although it is clearly apparent in the text of the laws.
Byzantine society was impregnated with the spirit of
Christianity. The Government felt itself in duty bound to
protect the weak and humble. It should be noted that
Romanus I Lecapenus, who led the struggle against the
'powerful', was himself distinguished by his philanthropic
activity.
One can only conjecture how it was that the system of
moderate and small holdings came to be prevalent in the
eighth century. This fact was formerly explained as due to
the substitution of Slav settlers for the original cultivators.
But this 'Slav' theory, which moreover could apply only to a
part of the Empire, has been abandoned by the Slavs them-
selves. The tendency to-day is to believe that the great
diminution in the number of large estates (they never
disappeared entirely) was due to the terrible invasions in
Europe of the barbarians of the north and in Asia of the
Persians and the Saracens, and also perhaps to the oppressive
administration of Phocas and of Justinian II. Concurrently,
the composition of the agricultural class was completely