** you do not have permission to see this link **

The Roman empire fell even though they had Archimedes work, and it was copied until at least 950, only to be overwritten in 1229. The assertion that we may have had a shorter middle ages, and the enlightenment would have occurred much sooner than it did, if Renaissance mathematicians did not have to recreate his math and sciences in the 15th & 16th century, so that technology was set back as much as 300 years, seems dubious to me. Contrastingly, Constantine’s conversion occurs about 900 years before the washing off and “loss” of Archimedes work. The sad fact is that an Archimedes, Newton, or Einstein come along so seldom. My vote is that Constantine’s conversion was by far more pivotal, even if we characterize it as a setback to math and science and western free thought and progress (based on the oppression that Copernicus, Galileo, et al, experienced). At least the church scribes preserved what they did (even if they did not understand or appreciate “The Method”). We often assign more blame to the powers that be, the authorities in charge, than a stoic like Epictetus would advise.

** you do not have permission to see this link **