MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1997840191 · doi:10.1353/mou.0.0044

Lessons from the Past: The Moral Use of History in Fourth-century Prose (review)

2008· article· en· W1997840191 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Noreen Humble

Notice bibliographique

RevueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of Canada · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueClassical Antiquity Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHistoryLiteratureAestheticsEnvironmental ethicsPhilosophyArt

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Lessons from the Past: The Moral Use of History in Fourth-century Prose Noreen Humble Frances Pownall . Lessons from the Past: The Moral Use of History in Fourth-century Prose. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2004. Pp. x + 204. US$60 ISBN 0-472-11327-5 Pownall's monograph stems from her doctoral dissertation of 1993 in which she examined "the tendency of certain Greek historians of the fourth century B.C. to sacrifice accuracy, relevance, and impartiality to the presentation of moral exempla" (v), with the focus being on Xenophon, Theopompus and Ephorus. The aim of the monograph is broader: to show how "the interpretation of the past as a series of moral paradigms" (1) evolved in terms of the development of Greek historiography. To this end the monograph is structured thus. The first chapter examines the intellectual trends in the late fifth century in order to look for the origins of this change. Particular emphasis is placed on the influence of Socrates and Isocrates who were both, in their own ways, particularly concerned with morality in public life. Pownall then divides the rest of the book into four chapters dealing with particular works of pupils of these two prominent intellects: Plato's Menexenus and Xenophon's Hellenica on the Socratic side and Ephorus' History and Theopompus' Philippica on the Isocratean side. The argument develops as follows. In Chapter 1, "The Intellectual Context," Pownall sets out to show that "the reasons for the prominence of the moral element in fourth-century historical writing are to be found in the reverberations in the intellectual milieu from decades of political, social and economic upheaval" (9). The rise of the sophistic movement in particular is highlighted as important though the evidence is scanty and biased. Concepts like atheism and moral relativity were topics of intellectual discussion; persuasion and making the weaker argument the stronger were typical goals of the movement. Standing somewhat apart and linked by their concern for morality as a basis for public life were Socrates, so the works of his pupils Plato and Xenophon suggest both in how they present him and in how they develop their own ideas, and Isocrates, whose own extant speeches reveal this. The latter's coupling of rhetoric with moral instruction is evident in the two historians who are sometimes assigned to his school: Ephorus and Theopompus. A discussion of what moral virtues [End Page 76] were important to the elite at the beginning of the fourth century (29–37) concludes the chapter. Here the virtues praised in Isocrates' Evagoras, Xenophon's Agesilaos and Cyropaedia and [Plato's] Alcibiades are set forth as representative. Chapter 2, "The Menexenus: Plato's Critique of Political Rhetoric," discusses how in the Menexenus Plato criticises contemporary oratorical practice and its pandering to the masses without any moral end. Plato "parodies the conventional distortions of the funeral oration in order to subvert the sanitized versions of the past presented by the orators in Athens as a means of promoting democratic ideology" (48). By contrast, Plato is all for distorting history when it promotes a moral end, as seen elsewhere in his use of the noble lie. When the aim is to make people better, distortion is acceptable (63). Chapter 3, "Xenophon's Hellenica," argues first that Xenophon's apparent blatant omissions of contemporary events such as the foundation of the second Athenian league, the foundation of Megalopolis and the re-foundation of Messene are not to be put down to pro-Spartan, anti Theban bias—as they often are—but can be explained by his "desire to use lessons from the past for the moral instruction of his fellow aristocrats" (66). That is, he leaves these events out in favour of others which provide strong moral exempla. Programmatic statements are then discussed, particularly how Xenophon intrudes sometimes in the narrative to almost apologise for harping on about what some might consider insignificant (such as Teleutias' devotion to his men, HG 5.1.4) but which he considers important (80–2). Then ways in which Xenophon instills the moral lessons in his readers are examined: a) explicit praise or blame, b) by example, c) use of...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,014

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0030,006
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,002
Communication savante0,0040,006
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,048
Tête enseignante GPT0,262
Écart entre enseignants0,214 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of CanadaMême sujetClassical Antiquity StudiesTravaux en français237 207