Un gruppo di Teseo con il Minotauro dall'"Albanum Domitiani". Origine e dispersione delle antichità Barberini
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A sculpture of Theseus and the Minotaur from the Albanum Domitiani. Origin and dispersion of the Barberini antiquities. In the 18th century a marble bust representing the Minotaur was housed in Palazzo Barberini near the Quattro Fontane. It was subsequently bought and restored by Bartolomeo Cavaceppi and finally ended up in the Vatican Museums. On the basis of inventories it is possible to establish its provenance from Villa Barberini to Castel Gandolfo, which stood above the ruins of the Albanum Domitiani. Housed in the antiquarium of the present-day papal villa in the torso of a youth, a copy from an original whose replicas have already been interpreted as parts of groups from the Flavian age representing the myth of the Minotaur (Athens, Rome). Is it possible, with these two fragments, to reconstruct a similar group in the villa of Domitian? The struggle between Theseus and the Minotaur appears to have been a subject particularly admired by Domitian, who in the Domus Flavia had a fountain built in the form of a labyrinth, at whose centre a group of the same subject my be hypothesized (a similar motif alluding to imperial power was used in the palace of Galerius at Gamzigrad). In Domitian propaganda a number of factors seem to support the choice of the archetypal image of the labyrinth and of Theseus as an exemplary hero: the resurgence of analogous Augustean symbols, Alexandrian models, allusions to the Athens acropolis and its patron goddess. It is therefore possible to propose the existence of a parallel between Domitian and Theseus -both favourites of Athena, the goddess of Metis, both presented as civilizing heroes, both seeking the reappropriation and legimization of power that had initially been denied them.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".