William V. Harris . Dreams and Experience in Classical Antiquity . Cambridge : Harvard University Press . 2009 . Pp. xv, 332. $49.95.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
“He came to Cape Malea in early spring, with the intention of sailing for Rome. This was his project, but he had a dream that a tall, elderly lady embraced him and asked him to stay with her before he went to Italy. She claimed to be the nurse of Zeus, and she wore a crown adorned with every product of land and sea. Apollonius thought the vision over and realized that he must first sail to Crete” (p. 28). That dream-vision happened sometime in the first century c.e. It was experienced, according to Philostratus (ca. 170–247 c.e.), by the wandering wonderworker Apollonius of Tyana (Philostratus, Vita Ap. 4.34). The vision is typical of a very common dream genre that William V. Harris terms the epiphany or messenger dream. He traces this genre from early antiquity (Homer) to the sixteenth century. Philostratus illustrates the bare bones of the epiphany dream. It consists of “the appearance to the dreamer of an authoritative personage who may be divine or represent a god, and this figure conveys instructions or information” (p. 4). There are less obvious elements associated with this type of vision. Harris maintains that a typical epiphany dream usually contains three elements. First, “attention is all or mostly focused on a single visitor to the sleeper”; in Apollonius' dream this is the old woman. Second, “the visitor is authoritative—he/she/they may be deceptive, and the dreamer may resist, but the dreamer always knows that the visitor is likely to be truth-telling or to deserve obedience”; third, “the visitor conveys an admonition or pronouncement, the meaning of which is clear to the dreamer or eventually becomes clear” (pp. 36–37). Apollonius was so clear about the old woman's message that he changed the route of his voyage.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".