Seems quite sound to me. I don't know if it would "never" end in the sense it's never stable, but in the sense that there's always the potential for banditry flaring up . . . I agree completely.
My suspicion is that the eastern part of the plateau is probably better than the center, if only because - hopefully - the Armenians provide a more stable/settled element, as opposed to how the center is pretty much Turcoman and whatever's moved in to dilute them.
On the other hand, it is the borderland, and whether Khwarezm stands or falls, there will be Turcomen who aren't Byzantine citizens on that border.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/98/byzantineempires.jpg/ East in this context meaning Colonea and eastward - maybe even Sebastia.
Which brings up a question - not something you have to answer right away, but if you do, all the better - how far east are the Byzantines going?
Nothing much except the problems of en extended frontier stops them going all the way to Vaspurakan, given time to take Anatolia first.
My suspicion is that the eastern part of the plateau is probably better than the center, if only because - hopefully - the Armenians provide a more stable/settled element, as opposed to how the center is pretty much Turcoman and whatever's moved in to dilute them.
On the other hand, it is the borderland, and whether Khwarezm stands or falls, there will be Turcomen who aren't Byzantine citizens on that border.
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/98/byzantineempires.jpg/ East in this context meaning Colonea and eastward - maybe even Sebastia.
Which brings up a question - not something you have to answer right away, but if you do, all the better - how far east are the Byzantines going?
Nothing much except the problems of en extended frontier stops them going all the way to Vaspurakan, given time to take Anatolia first.