10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 1 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

Grasping Reality with Both HandsThe Semi-Daily Journal of Economist J. Bradford DeLong: Fair, Balanced, Reality-Based, and Even-HandedDepartment of Economics, U.C. Berkeley #3880, Berkeley, CA 94720-3880; 925 7080467; delong@econ.berkeley.edu.

Economics 210aWeblog ArchivesDeLong Hot on GoogleDeLong Hot on Google BlogsearchSeptember 14, 2010

James Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor

Justinian, Robin of Locksley, Rebecca Daughter of Mordecai,

King Richard, and Others..

Cato Unbound: James Scott: The Trouble with the View from Above.

A comment:

In 542 AD the late Roman (early Byzantine?) Emperor Justinian I wrote to hisPraetorian Prefect concerning the army--trained and equipped and paid for by theRoman State to control the barbarians and to "increase the state." Justinian was, PeterSarris reports in his Economy and Society in the Age of Justinian, upset that:

certain individuals had been daring to draw away soldiers and foederati from theirduties, occupying such troops entirely with their own private business.... Theemperor... prohibit[ed] such individuals from drawing to themselves or divertingtroops... having them in their household... on their property or estates.... [A]nyindividual who, after thirty days, continues to employ soldiers to meet his privateneeds and does not return them to their units will face confiscation of property..."and those soldiers and fioderati who remain in paramonar attendance uponthem... will not only be deprived of their rank, but also undergo punishments upto and including capital punishment."

Justinian is worried because what is going on in the country he rules is not legible tohim. Soldiers--soldiers whom he has trained, equipped, and paid for--have been hiredaway from their frontier duties by the great landlords of the Empire and employed ontheir estates and in the areas they dominate as bully-boys. One such great landlord wasJustinian's own sometime Praefectus Praetorio per Orientem Flavius Apion, to whomone of Flavius's tenants and debtors, one Anoup, wrote:

Dashboard Blog Stats Edit Post

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 2 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

No injustice or wickedness has ever attached to the glorious household of my kindlord, but it is ever full of mercy and overflowing to supply the needs of others. Onaccount of this I, the wretched slave of my good lord, wish to bring it to yourlordship's knowledge by this present entreaty for mercy that I serve my kind lordas my fathers and forefathers did before me and pay the taxes every year. And bythe will of God... my cattle died, and I borrowed the not inconsiderable amount of15 solidi.... Yet when I approached my kind lord and asked for pity in my straits,those belonging to my lord refused to do my lord's bidding. For unless your pityextends to me, my lord, I cannot stay on my ktema and fulfill my services withregard to the properties of the estate. But I beseech and urge your lordship tocommand that mercy be shown to me because of the disaster that has overtakenme...

The late Roman Empire as Justinian wished it to be would consist of (a) slaves, (b) freeRoman citizens (some of whom owned a lot of land), (c) soldiers, (d) bureaucrats, and(e) an emperor. The slaves would work for their masters. Slaves along with theircitizen masters and non-slaveholding citizens would farm the empire (some of thecitizens owning their land; some renting it). All would be prosperous and pay theirtaxes. And the emperor would use the taxes to pay the soldiers who dealt with thePersians, the Huns, the Goths, and the Vandals; to fund the building of Hagia Sophiaand other works of architecture in Constantinople; and to promote the true faith andextirpate heresy. If the countryside were legible to him, that is how things would be--slaves and citizens in their places, landlords and tenants in their mutually-beneficialcontractual relationships, all prosperous and all paying their taxes to support theempire.

But Justinian knows very well that the countryside is not legible to him. The contractsthat Flavius Apion makes with his tenants are made under the shadow of the threatthat if Flavius Apion does not like the way things are going he will send a bucellarius

to beat you up. Anoup is not pointing out to Flavius Apion that their landlord-tenantrelationship is a good thing and that keeping him as a tenant rather than throwing himoff the land for failure to pay the rent is in both their interests. Instead, Anoup iscalling himself a slave (which he is not). Anoup is calling Flavius Apion a lord (whichhe is not supposed to be). Anoup is appealing to a long family history of dependence ofhimself and his ancestors on the various Flavii Apionoi and Flavii Strategioi of pastgenerations. Justinian thinks that things would be better served if the countryside wereproperly legible to him and he could enforce reality to correspond to the legal order ofslaves and citizens, tenants and landlords interacting through contract, and taxpayers.Flavius Apion would prefer that the order be one of proto-feudalism: that all theAnoups know and understand that they are at his mercy, and that the emperor is far,far away. And we don't know what Anoup thinks. We do know thait does not sound asthough he experiences the lack of legibility of the countryside to the emperor and hisstate as a full and complete liberation. And we do know that the Emperor Justinian wasgravely concerned about the transformation of his soldiers into bucellarii, into thedependent bully-boys of the landlords--both because it meant that they were not onthe borders where they belonged and because it disturbed what he saw as the properbalance of power in the countryside and what he saw as the emperor's justice.

Justinian's big (and to him insoluble) problem was that the Flavius Apion whose bully-boys beat up his tenants when they displeased was the same Flavius Apion who headedJustinian's own bureaucracy.

Thus when James Scott speaks of how local knowledge and local arrangements having

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 3 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

the ability to protect the people of civil society from an overmighty, blundering state, Isay "perhaps" and I say "sometimes."

It is certainly the case that the fact that Sherwood Forest is illegible to the Sheriff ofNottingham allows Robin of Locksley and Maid Marian to survive. But that is just astopgap. In the final reel of Ivanhoe the fair Rebecca must be rescued from theunworthy rogue Templar Sir Brian de Bois-Guilbert (and packed offstage to marrysome young banker or rabbi), the Sheriff of Nottingham and Sir Guy of Gisborne mustreceive their comeuppance, the proper property order of Nottinghamshire must berestored, and Wilfred must marry the fair Rowena--and all this is accomplished bymaking Sherwood Forest and Nottinghamshire legible to the true king, Richard I"Lionheart" Plantagenet, and then through his justice and good lordship.

A state that makes civil society legible to itself cannot protect us from its own fits ofideological terror, or even clumsy thumb-fingeredness. A state to which civil society isillegible cannot help curb roving bandits or local notables. And neither type of state hasproved terribly effective at constraining its own functionaries.

In some ways, the "night watchman" state--the state that enables civil society todevelop and function without distortions imposed by roving bandits, local notables,and its own functionaries, but that also is content to simply sit back and watch civilsociety--is the most powerful and unlikely state of all.

Brad DeLong on September 14, 2010 at 10:40 AM in History, Philosophy: Moral,Political Economy | Permalink

Reblog (0) |

Favorite

| Digg This | Save todel.icio.us | Tweet This!

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e551f080038834013487543f11970cListed below are links to weblogs that reference James Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup,the Emperor Justinian, Robin of Locksley, Rebecca Daughter of Mordecai, King Richard, andOthers..:

Comments

Robert Waldmann said...Ah yes Apion one of the bad guys in Count Belisarius by Robert Graves.

I'd note the rather long list of Justinian's uses for taxes " to pay the soldiers who dealtwith the Persians, the Huns, the Goths, and the Vandals; to fund the building of HagiaSophia and other works of architecture in Constantinople; and to promote the truefaith and extirpate heresy. " I might add that "increase the state" sure didn't mean"protect the state" as Justinian sent his soldiers do conquer North Africa and Italy.

The tyranny of Apion sure doesn't seem to me to be one of the innnumerable proofsthat libertarians are wrong -- I don't think it was easy back then to be any farther from

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 4 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

libertarian than Justinian (with improved technology more effective tyranny ispossible).

When land is the only real wealth, men at arms are very key to wealth and power. Lessso when there is active commerce. One aspect of the change from the Roman empire toFeudal Europe was reduced use of money. It is hard for the emperor to collect taxes ingrain. That might have been the point.

By the way, did you ever read a very interesting article entitled "Princes andMerchants" written by a couple of guys whose names I forget ?

Could it be that the great power of Apion over Anoup had something to do with theelimination of all institutions laws and rights which interfered with collecting taxes ?Might it be that the Apion's became extremely wealthy because the ability to staredown tax collectors gave them a great competitive advantage ?

Reply September 14, 2010 at 10:57 AMchristofay said...Where the banks are Apion:

"The Great American Stickup': It Was The Economy, Stupid"

'The facts are otherwise. It is not conspiratorial but rather accurate to suggest thatblame can be assigned to those who consciously developed and implemented a policyof radical financial deregulation that led to a global recession. As President Clinton'sTreasury secretary, Rubin, the former cochair of Goldman Sachs, led the fight to freethe financial markets from regulation and then went on to a $15-million-a-year jobwith Citigroup, the company that had most energetically lobbied for that deregulation.He should remember the line from the old cartoon strip Pogo: "We have met theenemy and he is us."

'For it was this Wall Street and Democratic Party darling, along with his clique ofeconomist super-friends -- Alan Greenspan, Lawrence Summers, and a few others --who inflated a giant real estate bubble by purposely not regulating the derivativesmarket, resulting in oceans of money that was poured into bad loans sold as safeinvestments. In the process, they not only caused an avalanche of pain and miserywhen the bubble inevitably burst but also shredded the good reputation of theAmerican banking system nurtured since the Great Depression.

'If we accept a broad dispersal of blame or a sense of inevitability -- or simply ignorethe details, since they can be so confusing -- we lose the opportunity to rearrange ourinstitutions to prevent such disasters from happening again.'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-scheer/the-great-american-sticku_b_715928.html

Reply September 14, 2010 at 11:51 AMPetey said..."Thus when James Scott speaks of how local knowledge and local arrangements havingthe ability to protect the people of civil society from an overmighty, blundering state, Isay "perhaps" and I say "sometimes."

Well, sure.

Local knowledge and local arrangements are best thought of as short-term buffers toslow the Emperor's desire for complete control.

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 5 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

No sane person wants a state that makes everything 100% perfectly legible to itself.But a sane person does want a state that slowly, and with accountability to localknowledge, makes civil society legible to itself, so it can thus function as a bettergovernment.

The 4th Amendment to the Constitution is a nice attempt to grapple with the issue, Ithink, even though it doesn't specifically require the Feds to get a LOCAL judge to signoff on probable cause...

-----

(I do wish you'd enable the bold and italic tags in the comment section, Brad. I hatemarking for emphasis with ALL CAPS, and I've lost the ability to write in short formwithout bold and italics.)

Reply September 14, 2010 at 11:53 AMNeal said..."Unlikely" is correct.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 12:02 PMJohn Howard Brown said...Apropos of this post, the proponents of the libertarian project of privatizing everything,including justice, rarely acknowledge that this has been tried. It was called feudalism,and scarcely represents a high point in the history of human freedom.

The paradox of liberty is that a strong state may be necessary to prevent the local bullyboys from depriving others of their freedom.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 12:14 PMNathanael said...NIIICEE.

Professor DeLong: Make this a book, or at least a published article in a major journal(of what? political theory?). This is the most insightful thing I've read in ages.

Seriously. This is really good stuff, and really important stuff.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 12:28 PMNathanael said in reply to Robert Waldmann..."Could it be that the great power of Apion over Anoup had something to do with theelimination of all institutions laws and rights which interfered with collecting taxes ?"

No. That's just absurd and unhistoric. There never were any such institutions, laws, orrights.

"Might it be that the Apion's became extremely wealthy because the ability to staredown tax collectors gave them a great competitive advantage ?"

Sort of but not exactly. The truth is more obvious:"Justinian's big (and to him insoluble) problem was that the Flavius Apion whosebully-boys beat up his tenants when they displeased was the same Flavius Apion whoheaded Justinian's own bureaucracy."

Who watches the watchmen?

Reply September 14, 2010 at 12:32 PMNathanael said in reply to Nathanael..."There never were any such institutions, laws, or rights."I mean in the background of Roman imperial history of course, not "never" universally.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 12:44 PM

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 6 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

jcb said...Here's a recipe for this article:

1.Hypostatize, hypostatize, hypostatize. Turn the abstract concept of a state into ahistorical actor. Make The State an all-knowing, all-seeking, all-encompassing -- andmalign! -- force. But . . .

2. Show the unintended unfortunate consequences of State power. The State thinks he'ssmart, but he really f***s up. Fewer windows to avoid taxes means more disease, etc.,etc.

3. Bring together apparently disparate pieces of knowledge -- much of it interesting --and show that they all possess an underlying similarity. Bet you didn't know whatnaming practices, scientific forestry, windows' taxes, power and "legibility" have incommon? The State!

4. Romanticize the traditional, small, natural community of folk wisdom and timelessmores. Standardization = Bad! Forget that members of traditional small communitiesalso sing kumbayas holding hands around bonfires that burn witches, expel strangers,and in general demonstrate a remarkable suspicion of anyone who is not a member ofthe small clan, tribe, lineage. Forget, too, that anything good coming out of theEnlightenment ("We hold these truths to be self-evident. . . ") consists in setting newstandards of common humanity -- sorry, in making a new concept of humanity"legible."

5. Send article to the libertarian Cato Institute, who will publish it. "See! The Statewants to make healthcare "legible." And upset the traditional, nurturing doctor-patientrelationship!" But . . .

6. Because the Romantic Reaction against power often joins conservative libertarianswith radical revolutionaries, include a brief coda in which you acknowledge that "large-scale capitalism is just as much an agency of homogenization, uniformity, grids, andheroic simplification as the state," and thereby set up yet another hypostatized entity:Large-Scale Capitalism. LSC is as separate from TS as . . . economics is from politics.

I agree with a truncated version of BD's comment that: "Thus when James Scott speaksof local knowledge and local arrangements having the ability to protect the people ofcivil society from an overmighty, blundering state, I say "perhaps" and I say"sometimes."" But let's leave out the specification: "from an overmighty, blunderingstate."

If I want reheated German metaphysics I will go to the master, Max Weber, who saidmuch the same thing and scrupulously avoided romantic cliches. We do need deeperstudy of the social and cultural expressions of rationalization. We don't needromanticized myths about the past.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 03:08 PMJed Harris said...Would be nice to have an analysis of "legibility". I don't think it is only or mainlyinformation -- more information can reduce legibility.

Legibility seems to be limited largely by our cognitive abilities and the quality of ourmodels. Given weak cognition and models we have to drastically simplify the parts ofreality we want to render legible.

My guess is that a lot of the problem with legibility are due to the (over)simplificationwe impose to compensate for our weakness.

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 7 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

Conversely that implies that if we could sufficiently empower "readers" we would nothave to simplify nearly as much, and the problems due to simplification could beavoided.

I'd argue that the reason open source and open content succeed is that "readers" areempowered. Nearly all the history and interaction is visible, and the environment isstructured to enhance legibility (through searching and filtering) while givingparticipants nearly free reign to organize their activities however they want -- up to butnot including the destruction or alteration of history.

Note that these open domains are very much reflexive "panopticons" -- within them,everyone's behavior is entirely visible to everyone else, and furthermore leaves anindelible record. Such visibility is often portrayed as a source of bleak nightmares, butin fact the participants find it entirely hospitable.

I'll refrain from conclusions to avoid foolish optimism.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 03:41 PMJohn said...In short, the state must control the powerful interests or the powerful interests willcontrol the state. At first glance, it seems a recipe ripe for dictatorship of either themonarch or the oligarchs. Fortunately, democracy is quite adept at controlling thestate... so long as no one else does.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 05:28 PMRon Calitri said...Very nicely done; and your example quite the antedyne to Scott's essay. I'd only addthat the practice of sovereign intervention to relieve increases of inequity obtained bythe powerful dates into the 3rd millennium BCE, preceding Justinian bt about 2,700years. (Khurt, 1995)

Reply September 14, 2010 at 07:13 PMAltoid said...It seems to me that most libertarians (and maybe Scott) are confused by Europeanusage of "the state" when talking about our federal government. And in that connectionit's interesting that his only American example is an at worst benign, at best life-savingimposition of power by the State of Connecticut that disambiguates locations forambulances. That in recent decades we may have been developing a more "state"-likenational government with similar over-arching claims derives from the pleas ofnational security more than anything else, and surely we have much more to fear fromthe Patriot Act than from welfare benefits.

In the abstract Scott's point seems pretty clear and not really worthy of the hoopla hisbook got-- imho "legibility" is more or less a synonym for "abstraction," sogovernments (primarily those professing ultimate authority on their particular bits ofearth) have abstracted the kinds of information they considered useful and used theirauthority to force these abstractions on locales. The other side to that, as jcb points to,is that locales have their own abstractions imposed by local authority structures. Onlysome of what happens locally is the volksmund at work; again, the benign example ofroad and locality names in Connecticut, but why not, say, the Venetian island ofGiudecca?

Though he may have only thrown in his reference as a sop, other entities clearly do thiskind of abstraction and imposition too; oil and gas drillers see land as places to putplatforms and hold waste, for example, and use the power of land ownership or

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 8 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

mineral rights to force their abstractions on locales. It's happening right now in theMarcellus shale formation a few miles from me.

@jcb, your 3rd point brings to mind James Burke's Connections, and reading Scott'sessay I had pretty much the same sense of schoolboy cleverness on show. But in lightof work on cadastral surveys, etc, the point seems unexceptionable. What thelibertarians want to make of it, though, is something else, and they need to rememberthat the federal government is declaredly not a successor state of imperial Rome.

Reply September 14, 2010 at 09:11 PMJohn Howard Brown said...A fascinating discussion, well worth developing into something more. Don't quite knowwhat.

Reply September 15, 2010 at 07:47 AMaimai said...I feel like I've been out of the loop a long time because I don't really get what's goingon in this discussion at all or how Brad's point rebuts Scott's. I've been reading a lot ofRoman history recently, the late Republican period specifically, and I don't see "TheRoman State" as an entity that lacks "legible" knowledge of its specifically Romancommunities. It had quite a bit of knowledge, perhaps dispersed among different kindsof sub state organizations, of its Italian provinces and each client holder had extensiveknowledge of his own clients. In the Empire, or the proto-Empire, local knowledge wascertainly left in the hands of intermediaries. Tax farmers are a good example of a gobetween whose specific function was to leave the State free of the duties of collectingtaxes directly.

There are lots of other States, and States in transition between more and lesscentralized. How does what Scott argues have anything to do with Egypt under thePharoes? Or China? or Japan? I guess I'm wondering why Scott focuses on weak,feudal, states instead of strong, centralized, states?

I'll go back and read the Scott essay again. Its good to have some fiber in your diet,intellectually, even if it is indigestible.

aimai

Reply September 15, 2010 at 09:21 AMaimai said...On the subject of places being "legible" and therefore being "controlled" I suppose Ishould get with the swing of things and say that Cambridge and its environs arepopularly supposed to have removed all local signage to prevent the British Troopsfrom being able to find the arms depot at Concord. The lack of good street signs hereis, again, popularly attributed to the need to keep outsiders confused. We also, ofcourse, have a street which is named "Lexington Street" when you are in Walthamheading to Lexington and Waltham Street when you are in Lexington headed toWaltham but I think the "solution" to the brain teaser is to grasp that lots of streetshave always changed name midway--the longer they are the more likely they are to doso--and that local knowledge includes using that name change to pinpoint locationsnot to obfuscate them.

I'd also like to point out that books like "The Mafia of a Sicilian Village" argued, quitesome time ago, that crime and oppression rush in where the state is too weak toenforce law.

aimai

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 9 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…peror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

Me: Economists:

PaulKrugmanMark ThomaCowen andTabarrokChinn andHamiltonBrad Setser

Juicebox

Mafia:

Ezra KleinMatthewYglesiasSpencerAckermanDanaGoldsteinDanFroomkin

Moral

Philosophers:

Hilzoy andFriendsCrookedTimber ofHumanityMarkKleiman andFriendsEricRauchwayand FriendsJohn Holboand Friends

Reply September 15, 2010 at 09:29 AMMike said...Perhaps I've misinterpreted, but does Don Boudreaux think the costs of Social Securityshould be weighed solely against its value in providing us with handy identificationnumbers?

Is he being serious?

Reply September 15, 2010 at 03:25 PMPetey said..."I feel like I've been out of the loop a long time because I don't really get what's goingon in this discussion at all or how Brad's point rebuts Scott's. I've been reading a lot ofRoman history recently, the late Republican period specifically, and I don't see "TheRoman State" as an entity that lacks "legible" knowledge of its specifically Romancommunities."

Well, that's the difference between Julius Caesar's office and Justinian's office...

Reply September 15, 2010 at 03:58 PMComments on this post are closed.

Economics Is not a Morality PlayNew York Times (blog) - Sep 28, 2010Brad DeLong catches someone wondering if I am actually advocating war as asolution to our problems. Against stupidity, the gods themselves … ...Related Articles » « Previous Next »

economics DeLong

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 10 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…eror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html

10/21/10 7:53 PMJames Scott, "Legibility," Flavius Apion, Anoup, the Emperor Justinian, Ro…of Mordecai, King Richard, and Others.. - Grasping Reality with Both Hands

Page 11 of 11http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2010/09/james-scott-legibility-flavius-api…eror-justinian-robin-of-locksley-rebecca-daughter-of-mordecai-king.html