12-15-2009, 11:10 AM
Yeah, I was just going to say that... actually a lot of that went over my head. While I wholeheartedly agree with what I think was the underlying point, that human affairs never neatly and consistently fit a mathematical formula, I don't think Stephen is using 'maths and maths alone' - his starting point is to trust the ancient sources to know what they were talking about (at least for their own time, if not for the time they were describing), to use them and then use the maths to look for a unifiying system. If such a formulaic organizing principle existed and persisted across the lifespan of the empire, that would be a really cool thing to identify, especially if in the process it resolves apparent inconsistencies among the surviving sources without resorting to saying 'x' must have made a mistake. But such a system would not preclude wide variations in actual practice at any given point in time, with local expedience overriding the theoretical ideal, and it certainly doesn't devalue any light the archaeology or any other discipline can throw on specific instances of those wide variations.
Probably I have just missed the point of what everyone was saying!
Phil Sidnell
Probably I have just missed the point of what everyone was saying!
Phil Sidnell