（文章翻译）封建主义再辩论：拜占庭案例（二）
上一部分
John Haldon. The feudalism debate once more: The case of Byzantium[J]. The Journal of Peasant Studies,1989(1). pp.5-40.
第三部分
Given these considerations, we can now view late Roman and Byzantine society without difficulty as having been dominated by feudal relations of production. That is to say, surpluses were appropriated through various forms of tax and rent, which are 'the sole prevailing and normal forms of surplus value, or surplus labour' in the feudal mode. This does not mean to say, of course, that they were the sole existing forms of surplus appropriation in this particular social formation. Slavery continued to exist, but even as early as the fourth century in the East seems to have played only a very limited role in production; there is plenty of imperial legislation to suggest that from this time on agricultural slaves were being rapidly turned into the equivalent of coloni adscripticii or serfs, given their own holdings or portions on estates, allowed to take partners and have children, and so on. The legal definition of a slave as an unfree person continued in use, of course, and reduction to slave-status remained a punishment throughout the Byzantine period. But as agricultural slaves came to approximate more and more to various degrees of tied but free tenant, the economic reality of slavery disappears: rent and tax, not the intensive, plantation-based exploitation of chattel slaves, are the main forms of surplus appropriation. Domestic and small-scale industrial slavery continued to exist, too, but this hardly affects the dominant mode of surplus appropriation. And even when large numbers of prisoners were taken in war and 'enslaved', they were often given state or other lands to cultivate, and expressly freed for a period from state taxes - hardly the typical treatment of slaves in the classical sense of the term [Hendy, 1985: 631ff.]. In spite of some exaggeration, therefore, slaves do not appear to have played a role of any significance in overall production in the late Roman and Byzantine world after the fourth century.
鉴于这些考虑，我们现在可以毫不费力地将罗马后期和拜占庭社会视为由封建生产关系所主导。也就是说，盈余是通过各种形式的税收和地租来占有的，这是封建模式中” 唯一普遍和正常的剩余价值或剩余劳动形式”。当然，这并不是说它们是这个特定社会形态中唯一存在的剩余占有形式。奴隶制继续存在，但甚至早在四世纪的东方，奴隶制似乎只在生产中发挥了非常有限的作用；有大量的帝国立法表明，从这个时候开始，农业奴隶被迅速转化为相当于coloni adscripticii(隶农，起源于一种交分成租（也就是实物地租）的自由佃农，但后来法律禁止农民自由迁徙，就逐渐成为当地大地主的属民)或农奴，被赋予自己的土地或庄园的一部分，被允许结婚和生孩子，等等。当然，奴隶作为非自由人的法律定义仍在继续使用，在整个拜占庭时期，降为奴隶的地位仍是一种惩罚。但随着农业奴隶越来越近似于不同程度的被捆绑但自由的佃农，奴隶制的经济现实就消失了：租金和税收，而不是对动产奴隶的密集的、基于种植园的剥削，是剩余占有的主要形式。家庭和小规模的工业奴隶制也继续存在，但这几乎不影响剩余占有的主导模式。甚至当大量的战俘在战争中被抓走并被“奴役”时，他们也常常被给予国家或其他土地来耕种，并明确地在一段时间内免于国家征税，这几乎不是古典意义上的奴隶的典型待遇[Hendy, 1985: 631ff. ] 。因此，尽管有些夸张，但在四世纪后的罗马和拜占庭世界，奴隶似乎并没有在整体生产中发挥任何重要作用。
In addition, the various forms which surplus appropriation could take were many. Private landlords normally collected rent in cash or kind, according to the nature of the contract or lease and the economic conditions (availability of markets, for example). The state exacted surpluses in both cash and kind (for the regular land taxes, for example), as well as through a variety of labour-services: maintenance of the postal stations and horses, for example, or the production of iron ores, were imposed instead of the usual standard taxes. Equally, local communities were on occasion required to help with the building of roads and bridges, or fortifications, and to billet and feed soldiers, officers and imperial officials en route from one posting to another, and so on. By the ninth century, and probably from the seventh century, the state demanded the production of weapons and various items of military equipment from the provincial populations, imposed as additional corvées; extraordinary levies in grain or other foods were not unusual; while military service itself, while not meriting exemption from the chief land- and hearth-taxes, did bring freedom from extraordinary levies and similar impositions. But the crucial point about all these forms of surplus appropriation is that they were obtained without exception through non-economic coercion - whether 'customary' obligations and the force of law, as in most cases, backed up ultimately by imperial military might, or by simple threat and bullying, whether by state officials, churchmen or private landlords is not important. This was an agrarian society of peasants and rural artisans, and they were the only realistic source of surplus production.
此外，盈余占有的形式也很多。私人地主通常根据合同或租约的性质和经济条件（例如，市场的可用性），以现金或实物形式收取租金。国家通过现金和实物（例如常规的土地税），以及各种劳动服务来征收盈余：例如，维护驿站和马匹，或生产铁矿石，都被用来代替通常的标准税。同样，地方社区有时也被要求帮助修建道路和桥梁或防御工事，并为士兵、军官和帝国官员提供食宿，以便他们从一个岗位前往另一个岗位，等等。到了九世纪（可能从七世纪开始），国家要求各省居民生产武器和各种军事装备，作为额外的徭役；对粮食或其他食物的特别征收也并不罕见；而兵役本身虽然不能免除主要的土地税和炉灶税，但却可以免于特别征收和类似征收。但是，关于所有这些形式的剩余拨款的关键点是，它们无一例外地是通过非经济胁迫获得的——无论是“习惯”义务和法律的力量，如在大多数情况下，最终由帝国的军事力量支持，还是通过简单的威胁和欺凌，无论是由国家官员、教会人士还是私人地主，都不重要。这是一个由农民和农村工匠组成的农业社会，他们是剩余生产的唯一现实来源。
What sort of state does this social formation support, therefore, and in particular, what enabled that state to survive the considerable changes which the 'Roman' world experienced between the fifth and the eighth centuries?
因此，这种社会形态支持什么样的国家，特别是，是什么使这种国家能够在“罗马”世界于五世纪和八世纪之间经历的巨大变化中生存下来？
In fact, not only did the state survive but it appears from the mists of the later seventh and early eighth centuries with a centralised fiscal and military administration which had clearly been able to evolve successfully new ways of dealing with the problems it encountered, most particularly in respect of defence and of revenue extraction. But there are two phases in this 'survival', and indeed, two 'survivals', that need to be differentiated: first, the continued existence of the eastern Roman empire after the final fragmentation of the western half into a number of Germanic successor kingdoms; and second, the continued existence of a state, although no longer the late Roman state (I would argue), after the seventh century, after Slavs and other peoples had overrun much of the Balkans, and after the rapid expansion of Islam had swept away Roman power in the Middle East and North Africa.
事实上，这个国家不仅幸存下来，而且从七世纪末和八世纪初的迷雾中出现了一个中央集权的财政和军事管理机构，它显然能够成功地发展出新的方法来处理它所遇到的问题，尤其是在国防和税收方面。但是，这种“生存”有两个阶段，实际上是两种“生存”，需要加以区分：第一，在西半部最终分裂为一些日耳曼人的继承王国之后，东罗马帝国继续存在；第二，在七世纪之后，斯拉夫人和其他民族占领了巴尔干的大部分地区，以及伊斯兰教的迅速扩张扫除了罗马在中东和北非的权力之后，一个国家继续存在，尽管不再是晚期罗马国家（我主张）。
The first of these survivals has received a great deal more attention than the second; for there has been an unfortunate, if understandable, tendency to treat the evolution and history of the East Roman and Byzantine states after the fifth century as an undifferentiated curve on the graph of historical change by both general commentators and specialists. Since the basic reasons for the continued existence of the eastern half of the empire after the fifth century have been elaborated by a number of historians, I need do no more than summarise results which, while they may be differently nuanced by Marxists as opposed to non-Marxists, nevertheless do represent the current consensus.
这些遗留问题中的第一个问题比第二个问题得到了更多的关注；因为有一种不幸的倾向，尽管可以理解，那就是一些评论家和专家都把五世纪以后东罗马和拜占庭国家的演变和历史当作历史变化图上的一条没有区别的曲线。由于一些历史学家已经阐述了五世纪后帝国东半部继续存在的基本原因，我只需总结一下结果，虽然这些结果可能会被马克思主义者和非马克思主义者有不同的细微差别，但确实代表了当前的共识。
In the first place, the power of the eastern senatorial elite was to a large extent moderated in the East by a greater density of cities and by the continued existence throughout the eastern regions of a middling group of landowners. There was, furthermore, always a greater number of more or less autonomous peasant communities, subject fiscally directly to the state; while the landowning elite in the East never came to dominate either the central imperial establishment or the civil bureaucracy in the way that the western senatorial establishment did [Jones, 1964: 1065-67]. The dominance of the military by outsiders was never as great in the East as it was in the West, and this was itself also the consequence of two interrelated aspects of late Roman culture in that area: first, the greater ideological and political cohesiveness of the Constantinopolitan bureaucratic establishment, the greater dependence of the office-holding senatorial elite on the imperial palace and the emperor for its social and economic position, and its more self-conscious cultural elitism and exclusiveness. The East was able to deal with specific problems on its own terms in a way that seems to have been impossible in the West - the successful handling of the 'German problem' in the early fifth century, for example, has been explicitly related to this aspect of East Roman political (as well as cultural) resilience. In addition, of course, and as has been frequently pointed out, senatorial economic interests and cultural identity in the West did not correspond as closely with those of the state as was the case in the East - tax evasion on a massive scale, and the extension of relations of landlord-tenant subordination and patronage (patro-cinium) ensured that the western half of the empire, with its smaller resource-base, its less developed urban economic structures and its greater class tensions (there were no uprisings in the East to match those of the various groups of Bacaudae in Gaul and Spain in the fifth century), presented a much less cohesive set of structures, and a much more fundamental series of antagonisms between state structures on the one hand and the social order on the other.
首先，东部元老院精英的权力在很大程度上因城市密度较大和整个东部地区继续存在中等规模的地主集团而得到缓和。此外，总是有更多的或多或少自治的农民社区，在财政上直接受制于国家；而东方的地主精英从未像西方的元老院那样支配中央帝国机构或文官机构[Jones, 1964: 1065-67] 。外来者对军队的支配在东方从来没有像在西方那样大，这本身也是该地区晚期罗马文化两个相互关联的方面的结果：首先，君士坦丁堡官僚机构的意识形态和政治凝聚力更强，任职的元老院精英在社会和经济地位上更依赖皇宫和皇帝，其文化精英主义和排他性更为自觉。东方能够以自己的方式处理具体问题，这在西方似乎是不可能的。例如，五世纪初对 “日耳曼部落问题”的成功处理，就与东罗马政治（以及文化）复原力的这一方面明确相关。此外，正如人们经常指出的那样，西部的元老院经济利益和文化认同并不像东部那样与国家的利益紧密相连——大规模的逃税，以及地主-佃户从属关系和赞助关系（patro-cinium）的扩展，确保了帝国的西半部。由于其资源基础较小，城市经济结构不发达，阶级关系更加紧张（东方没有发生与五世纪高卢和西班牙的各种Bacaudae（Bagaudae）团体相提并论的起义），其结构的凝聚力要小得多，国家结构与社会秩序之间的对立也更为根本。
In spite of the problems faced by the eastern half of the empire in the later fifth century, therefore, its greater political and social cohesiveness enabled it to survive both external attacks, as well as the disruption of economic and trading patterns in the Mediterranean - the establishment of the Vandal kingdom in North Africa, which by the late 450s had expanded far beyond its original treaty-borders and, with its developing naval power, presented a potential threat to both central and East Mediterranean lands. Even the factional conflict and civil wars of the reigns of Leo I (457-74), Zeno (474-91) and Anastasius I (491-518), which certainly divided the population and destabilised the imperial government, did not adversely affect the essential structures of the state apparatuses. Indeed, during the reign of Anastasius a major reform of the bronze coinage was undertaken which was to provide the basic framework for the monetary system of the empire until the twelfth century, and which promoted the further monetarisation of tax and revenue collection, as well as market-exchange activity throughout the empire: it should be recalled that the traditional coinage, through inflation and through the inability of the state to maintain a reliable ratio between bronze and gold, had fallen into considerable disarray during the fifth century.
因此，尽管帝国的东半部在五世纪后期面临着各种问题，但其更大的政治和社会凝聚力使其能够在外部攻击以及地中海经济和贸易模式的破坏中幸存下来——北非的汪达尔王国的建立，到公元五世纪50年代后期，它的扩张已经远远超出了其最初的条约边界，随着其海军力量的发展，对地中海中部和东部的土地都构成了潜在威胁。即使是利奥一世（457-74）、芝诺（474-91）和阿纳斯塔修斯一世（491-518）统治时期的派系冲突和内战，当然也造成了人口分裂和帝国政府的不稳定，但并没有对国家机构的基本结构产生不利影响。事实上，在阿纳斯塔修斯统治时期，对罗马货币进行了重大改革，这为帝国的货币体系提供了基本框架，直到12世纪，这促进了税收和收入的进一步货币化，以及整个帝国的市场交换活动：应该记得，由于通货膨胀和国家无法保持铜和金之间的可靠比例，传统货币体系在5世纪已经陷入相当混乱的状态。
This solid, urbanocentric social and cultural formation not only survived the demise of the western half of the empire, it was able during the sixth century, especially during the reign of Justinian I (527-65) to take the offensive and to recover large regions which had been lost to Germanic invaders or settlers: the Vandal kingdom of North Africa was destroyed and re-incorporated in a short campaign in 533-4; parts of South-East Spain were recovered from the Visigoths in 550; and in a long drawn-out war, the Ostrogothic kingdom of Italy was destroyed between 535 and 555 (although some Ostrogothic districts held out until 562).
这种稳固的、以城市为中心的社会和文化形态不仅在帝国西半部的消亡中幸存下来，而且在六世纪，特别是在查士丁尼一世统治时期（527-65），它能够采取攻势，收复被日耳曼入侵者或定居者夺走的大片地区。北非的汪达尔王国在533-4年的短暂战役中被摧毁并重新合并；西班牙东南部的部分地区在550年从西哥特人手中收复；在一场漫长的战争中，意大利的奥斯特罗哥特王国在535至555年间被摧毁（尽管部分东哥特地区一直坚持到562年）。
The cost of this imperialism was very great, however. Minor reforms of the fiscal administration meant greater exactions from the producing populations of the empire; Italy itself was devastated and its rural and urban economies shattered; the army was neither adequately resourced nor its ranks filled, yet neither could the revenues of the state support a greater demand from this quarter. The enormous cost of warfare in ancient states is strikingly summed up by the anonymous sixth-century compiler of a treatise on strategy, who notes that the greater part of the state's income is expended on the army. And within ten years of the final reconquest of Italy, the invasion of the Lombards (from 568) had destroyed what little peace the peninsula had enjoyed. Henceforth it becomes increasingly marginal to imperial interests - although its ideological significance remained considerable for many years.
然而，这种帝国主义的代价是非常大的。财政管理的小改革意味着向帝国的生产人口征收更多的费用；意大利本身遭到了破坏，其农村和城市经济被打破；军队既没有足够的资源，也没有足够的兵员，但国家的收入也无法支持来自这一领域的更大需求。六世纪的匿名战略论文编纂者对古代国家的巨大战争成本进行了惊人的总结，他指出，国家收入的大部分都花在了军队上。而在最后重新征服意大利的十年内，伦巴第人的入侵（从568年开始）破坏了半岛所享有的一点和平。从此，它对帝国的利益来说变得越来越边缘化，尽管它的意识形态意义在许多年里仍然相当重要。
In addition to the exhaustion of resources resulting from these vast campaigns of reconquest (and the constant drain of fighting also with the Sassanid Persian empire in the East) recurrent plague also took its toll. The graphic account of the historian Procopius, secretary to the general Belisarius, of its effect in Constantinople - while based on the account of Thucydides of the plague in fifth-century (B.C.) Athens, and while no doubt considerably exaggerated - gives some idea of the psychological effects it had. From the 570s, the infiltration of groups of Slav immigrants across the Danube and into the Balkans, penetrating even into the Peloponnese by the 590s; the constant wars with the Persians, and with the Turkic Avars in the Balkans, represented a massive expenditure in resources, cash and manpower. During the reign of Justin II (565-78) the state's fiscal exactions became ever more severe, so that his successor, Tiberius Constantine (578-82) had to remit all taxes for a year in order to give the peasant producers time to recover.
除了这些大规模的重建运动（以及与东方的萨珊波斯帝国的持续战斗）导致的资源枯竭外，反复发生的瘟疫也造成了损失。历史学家普罗柯比（Procopius）是贝利萨留将军的秘书，他对瘟疫在君士坦丁堡的影响的生动描述（虽然是基于修昔底德对五世纪（公元前）雅典瘟疫的描述，而且无疑是相当夸张的）让人对它的心理影响有一些了解。从公元六世纪70年代开始，一批批斯拉夫人移民越过多瑙河来到巴尔干半岛，到公元六世纪90年代甚至渗透到伯罗奔尼撒半岛；与波斯人以及巴尔干半岛上的突厥阿瓦尔人的不断战争，代表了资源、现金和人力方面的巨大支出。在查士丁二世（565-78）统治时期，国家的财政征收变得更加严厉，因此他的继任者提比略二世·君士坦丁（578-82）不得不减免一年的所有税收，以便给农民生产者恢复的时间。
Yet in spite of these problems, and the exhausting wars fought with the Persians between 603 and 626, the East Roman state in the early 630s still embraced North Africa, Egypt, most of what is today Syria, Iraq and much of Jordan, along with the Lebanon and Palestine, Anatolia, much of the Balkans, Sicily, Sardinia and still considerable areas of Italy (in practice, of course, much of the Balkan zone was out of real imperial control, dominated by Slav tribal and clan principalities). Again, the cohesiveness of the state apparatuses and the still considerable resources at their disposal lies behind this success. But the old imperial system could only tolerate so much pressure. And when in the 630s the Arabs emerged from the Arabian Peninsula under the banner of Islam and the holy war, imperial resistance was little more than token. Low morale, insufficient resources, ideological divisions, insufficiently flexible defensive strategies all played a role. By 642, all of Egypt and the Middle Eastern provinces had been lost, Arab forces had penetrated deep into Asia Minor and Libya; and imperial forces had been withdrawn into Asia Minor, across the provinces of which they were to be settled as the only available means of supporting them. Within a period of some 12 years, it has been calculated that the empire lost over half of its territory and three-quarters of its resources - a drastic loss for the imperial state, which still had to maintain and equip a considerable army and a large bureaucracy.
尽管存在这些问题，以及在603年至626年间与波斯人进行的令人疲惫的战争，东罗马国家在7世纪30年代初仍然囊括了北非、埃及、今天叙利亚的大部分地区、伊拉克和约旦的大部分地区，以及黎巴嫩和巴勒斯坦、安纳托利亚、巴尔干半岛的大部分地区、西西里岛、撒丁岛和意大利的大部分地区（当然，实际上巴尔干地区的大部分地区不在帝国的真正控制之下，由斯拉夫部落和部族公国所主导）。同样，这种成功的背后是国家机构的凝聚力和它们所掌握的大量资源。但是，旧的帝国体系只能容忍这么大的压力。而当7世纪30年代阿拉伯人打着伊斯兰教和圣战的旗号从阿拉伯半岛崛起时，帝国的抵抗不过是象征性的。士气低落、资源不足、意识形态的分裂、不够灵活的防御战略都起到了作用。到642年，埃及和中东各省全部丢失，阿拉伯军队深入到小亚细亚和利比亚；帝国军队被撤回到小亚细亚，跨越他们要定居的省份，这是唯一可用的支持手段。据计算，在大约12年的时间里，帝国失去了一半以上的领土和四分之三的资源，这对帝国国家来说是一个巨大的损失，它仍然需要维持和装备一支相当大的军队和一个庞大的官僚机构。
The effects of this catastrophe on the East Roman state can hardly be calculated, and a detailed analysis would take up too much space here. But as a result of all these developments, which interwove with the evolution of East Roman social and economic structures and ideology over the same period, there arises a very different social and cultural formation. The physical context - greatly reduced in size - the conditions of climate and geography, remain very much the same. But late Roman urban culture vanishes almost completely, together with a great deal of the cultural capital it carried with it. New systems of thought develop, new approaches to visual representation; the emphases within literary culture, and indeed the bearers of that culture, change considerably; radical transformations of the fiscal and military administration occur. The relationships of power to land and to office within the ruling elite change. The old senatorial establishment, with much of the literary cultural baggage associated with it, disappears during the seventh century to be replaced by a service elite of very different and very varied ethnic, social and cultural origins. And while there is little reason to doubt that this new, pseudo-meritocratic elite incorporated many elements of the older establishment, those aspects of traditional elite culture which did survive came to play a different role in the symbolic universe, in the ideological world, of the evolving culture. The disappearance of the cities as municipalities (although very many survived as small defended settlements or fortresses with little orno urban exchange activity) meant that there took place a ruralisation of the state. Wealthy provincials found access to position and authority blocked off at the local level; henceforth they turned to Constantinople, the seat of empire, the one source of wealth, status and power, in which to invest their social capital. Only the Church provided an alternative career structure, and that too was centred in Constantinople, its administrative structures paralleling in many ways those of the state. Centralisation of fiscal administration, which had been slowly increasing in pace since the middle of the fifth century as the municipalities proved themselves more and more unable to carry out the fiscal burdens they had traditionally borne, along with 'rationalisation' of the various departments of civil and military administration, produced a very different administrative establishment. The emperor and the court became, more than ever before, the sources of all social advancement: while there were all sorts of minor routes to power which were not directly pulled into this nexus, nevertheless the imperial court constituted the dominant mode of entry. One of the most striking symptoms of this changed social and cultural formation is the acute nature of the ideological struggles over imperial authority in the religious and political-military sphere during the second half of the seventh century and the eighth century. One or two of these changes are worth particular attention.
这场灾难对东罗马国家的影响几乎无法计算，详细的分析在这里会占用太多的篇幅。但作为所有这些发展的结果，与同一时期东罗马社会和经济结构以及意识形态的演变交织在一起，出现了一个非常不同的社会和文化形态。自然环境（面积大大缩小）气候和地理条件，仍然非常相同。但罗马晚期的城市文化几乎完全消失了，连同它所携带的大量文化资本一起。新的思想体系的发展，新的视觉表现方法；文学文化中的重点，以及这种文化的承载者，都发生了很大的变化；财政和军事管理发生了根本性的转变。权力与土地的关系以及统治精英内部的职位关系都发生了变化。旧的元老院机构，以及与之相关的许多文学文化包袱，在七世纪期间消失了，取而代之的是具有非常不同的民族、社会和文化渊源的服务精英们。虽然没有什么理由怀疑这个新的、伪君主制的精英阶层吸收了旧体制的许多元素，但传统精英文化的那些方面确实幸存下来，在不断发展的文化的象征宇宙和意识形态世界中发挥了不同的作用。城市作为市镇的消失（尽管许多城市作为小型防御性定居点或堡垒而存在，几乎没有城市交流活动）意味着国家发生了农村化。富裕的外省人发现在地方上获得地位和权力的途径被封锁了；因此，他们转向君士坦丁堡，帝国的所在地，财富、地位和权力的唯一来源，在那里投资他们的社会资本。只有教会提供了另一种职业结构，而且也是以君士坦丁堡为中心，其行政结构在许多方面与国家的行政结构相类似。财政管理的中央化，自五世纪中叶以来，随着各市镇被证明越来越无力承担它们传统上所承担的财政负担，以及民事和军事管理各部门的“合理化”，一直在缓慢地增加步伐，产生了一个非常不同的行政机构。皇帝和宫廷比以往任何时候都更成为所有社会进步的源泉：虽然有各种不直接进入这一关系的次要途径，但宫廷构成了主要的进入方式。这种变化的社会和文化形成的最显著的症状之一是，在七世纪下半叶和八世纪，在宗教和政治军事领域争夺皇权的意识形态斗争的尖锐性。其中有一两个变化值得特别注意。
未完待续！（超字数了，放在下一篇）
