An aside to Lawrence, since he was mentioning Lenin's Imperialism as the Highest Stage of Capitalism: I have read it and I consider it an excellent essay, does that make me a Marxist ? I don't see myself as one. I do believe that Lenin was a very intelligent and educated man, whatever his moral and political faults were. (The same could not be said about Stalin.) O.K. On , Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: There are several meaning to Byzantine: ByzantineLine breaks: By¦zan|tine Pronunciation: /bɪˈzantʌɪn , bʌɪ-/ ADJECTIVE * 1Relating to Byzantium, the Byzantine Empire, or the Eastern Orthodox Church. * 1.1Of an ornate artistic and architectural style which developed in the Byzantine Empire and spread to Italy, Russia, and elsewhere. The art is typified by religious wall paintings and icons and the architecture by many-domed churches. MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES * 2(also byzantine) (Of a system or situation) excessively complicated, and typically involving a great deal of administrative detail: Byzantine insurance regulations MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES * 2.1Characterized by deviousness or underhand procedure: he has the most Byzantine mind in politics On Monday, April 14, 2014 7:53 PM, "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx> wrote: In a message dated 4/14/2014 8:40:57 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx writes: James Bryce is an author who definitely compared the Roman and the British modes of imperial administration, particularly the administration in India. His essay "The Ancient Roman Empire and the British Empire in India" is here: http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/bryce/TwoHistoricalStudies.pdf This is a good link. For the record, Wikipedia has an entry on Bryce, who was ambassador to the USA, and a native of Ireland, as I recall. He is best known, the Wikipedia entry says, as a Byzantinist, but apparently he hated the label (* Oddly this reminds me of Grice *) -- but he did write a story of the later Empire (Oddly, in Italian 'history' and 'story' are NOT distinguished! -- do not multiply senses beyond necessity). It would have been good if Bryce just focused on comparing Roman Empire and Brtish Empire _simpliciter_ rather than "British Empire IN INDIA" as he does -- which takes away some of the general interest his study might otherwise have! But apparently the two things were _pretty_ different. L. Helm was wondering about 'fruitful comparisons', borrowing a phrase from Historum. In the case of Bryce, I do wonder. The thing, published circa 1914 I think, by the Clarendon Press (typically) may have been influential -- and perhaps taught a lesson or two to the Oxford-educated Civil Servants that populated India back then. Incidentally, Bryce has a lot of titles. He is The Right Honourable The Viscount Bryce OM GCVO PC FRS FBA -- if you mustn't! The site Omar K. mentions comprises two studies by Bryce: this comparison and one on Roman Law and British Law. Cheers, Speranza * Once J. L. Austin said to Grice, "Trouble with you is you don't care what the dictionary says" "I don't. I actually give a hoot what the dictionary says". "And that's where you make your big mistake". The next day Grice did follow Austin's advice. He started to browse the Oxford Concise Dictionary, from A to Z. He was then analysing 'feeling aggravated', ;feeling amazed', 'feeling angry' but he stopped when he reached 'byzantine' for he found he could find an implicature, even, for 'I'm feeling rather byzantine today." * * ** Seriously, it's a good thing that Bryce is called a Byzantinist, although he said he was writing on Roman history simpliciter. He possibly rejected the idea that the Roman Empire comprised two parts: occidentalis and orientalis. As history goes, the attempt of Byzantine reconquest was an interesting thing and left a mark or two if only in ecclesiastical architecture! ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html