The Shifting Sycophant: Changing Implications of a Label in Athenian Democracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The traditional consensus among classicists holds that the word "sycophant" in Attic Greek refers to identifiable persons displaying a specific pattern of behaviour that is detrimental to the Athenian democracy. In particular, sycophants are individuals who initiate or threaten malicious or frivolous prosecutions for financial gain. Some recent re-assessments have suggested that the term is more nuanced, but such assessments still interpret the term as reflecting real or perceived problems inherent in the Athenian jury-courts. A comparison of the use of the term in the plays of Aristophanes with that in the speeches of fourth-century orators suggests that "sycophant" is solely a term of invective and does not refer to an identifiable type of individual. Moreover, this comparison reveals that, rather than being a static term, the implications inherent in the label change over time. When "sycophant" is coined in the later fifth century it is used against supporters of the radical democracy in order to support a change to a much more limited democracy or to oligarchy. A later generation of fourth-century orators employs the same label as a more general term of abuse against personal enemies or political opponents of any political stripe. Secondary meanings associated with the term allow its continued use as a rhetorical tool in a different political context with a different intent, but these continuities in its meaning have masked the change in its purpose. A clearer understanding of the label of "sycophant" lays the foundation for a more nuanced understanding of Athenian democratic discourse and of the transformation of that discourse in the course of the fourth century BCE.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".