Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the large corpus of scholarly writing about the Roman army, the military oath, or sacramentum, of the late Republican legions has not been studied at length. Since the fall of the Republican was rooted in the struggle for political and military dominance by individuals, the loyalty of the legions to these commanders is of utmost importance. The first chapter focuses on the geographic and social origins of the soldiers of the late Republic, which have been studied extensively and provide a background from which to assess the composition of the army. As well, the conditions of service for this period are significant factors affecting the obedience of soldiers to their commanders, and the second chapter of this thesis places particular emphasis on problems of length of service, pay, booty and plunder, and military discipline. This framework of conditions and characteristics supports the analysis of the sacramentum itself in the third chapter. The textual evidence for the oath, both direct and indirect, are gathered for comparative purposes and applied to historical anecdotes of loyal and disloyal behaviour for the period in question. Conclusions about the religion and psychological impact of the sacramentum complete this assessment of the effectiveness of the Roman military oath in the late Republic.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".