Greece or Rome?: The Uses of Antiquity in Late Eighteenth‐ and Early Nineteenth‐Century British Literature
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Traditionally, literary and artistic production in late eighteenth‐ and early nineteenth‐century Britain has been understood as constituting a modernity in opposition to classical values and aesthetic standards. In thinking about the relevance of classical antiquity in the later eighteenth and early nineteenth century, however, one prominent trend in recent scholarship has been the recognition of an increasing fascination with Greece and Greek culture. This article surveys arguments for the rise of Hellenism and its importance for thinking about the literary works of this period. In the face of claims for the dominance of the Greek example, the article further considers the legacy of Rome and explores the scholarly debate over its continued relevance in the period. Ultimately, the article suggests the need to consider the deployment of both Roman and Greek examples in framing contemporary understandings of such central aspects of modernity as democracy, popular revolt, and tyranny in a period whose political culture was dominated by reaction and anxieties about revolution.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it