On the Byzantines, isn’t your criticism that they were a religious state a bit whiggish? I can’t think of any non-religious states at the time (of note) — what I like them for is they had a rich intellectual tradition and were a lot more cosmopolitan than Europe and most other civilisations at the time.

Not sure the dark ages would apply to Byzantium, I don’t think there was ever the same stagnation as in Europe. And wouldn’t the “east” be on the same reasonably level as Byzantium? This is why I like [find interesting] the Abbasid Caliphate as well — these were two civilisations that had a lot going for them at a time when the Europeans were barbarians.

As for the Byzantines, as a whole, I don’t think that this long-lived empire has produced much. My opinion is that it was a religious state and, as such, it prevented real progress rather than aid it. Of course, some of them were able. They did have an apparently good way of living. When, at times, western Europeans had forgotten how to use sanitation systems, the Byzantines where much cleaner. But still, these were “dark” ages. One can argue that it was still darker in the east, but the Byzantine (emperors, say) were not that enlightened either.

It’s interesting to hear that you “love” the Byzantines. Perhaps I’m biased: I admit that. I see Byzantine stuff all around me in Greece and I can’t quite understand what’s so great.

Maybe I’m just biased because I love the Byzantines and don’t think they were useless at all.

1. PROBABILITY REASONING: Every decision is taken with a certain degree of risk. As human beings (even if we are unaware of the mathematical theory of Probability) we tend to form empirical estimates of probability and, based on these, we take action. For example, a good backgammon player knows the strong positions, empirically. If I send a message and receive 100 acks, as a response of an equal number of acks, then I know that, with extraordinarily high probability, the message has gone through. This is, of course, based on some assumptions (such as that the acks are not sent by an evil guy). And, of course, I also assume that I’m not anally retentive to want to have probability exactly equal to 100% before I take action; which takes me to the second remark.

2. BUREAUCRACY, ADMINISTRATION AND REAL ABILITIES: It is well-known that there is a negative correlation between the amount of bureaucratic tendencies of a person (an Academic, say, who wants to communicate his/her decisions by dozens of formal letters written according to the Law) and this person’s real abilities. In other words, when someone does not want to take an action based on intuitive (obvious) criteria but, rather, waits to follow exactly an endless series of procedures (always justifying them as being what the Law says), then this person is called a Bureaucrat. This person is a hindrance to Civilization. Politicians are like this. Academics (in more and more universities around the world) are like this too. Byzantine rulers were like this. It is, merely, convenient for someone to become a bureaucrat. It is an excuse for avoiding to do real work. Or to think.

P.S. As a counterexample to my alluding that the Byzantines were entirely useless (they mostly were), please see my latest posting.