MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964794604 · doi:10.3138/mous.16.1-06

Gregory of Nazianzus and Q. Aurelius Symmachus: The Conflict between East and West and Elite Self-Presentation in the Later Fourth Century AD Rome and Constantinople

2019· article· en· W2964794604 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Christopher Lougheed

Bibliographic record

VenueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of Canada · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElitePresentation (obstetrics)Quarter (Canadian coin)HistoryAncient historyClassicsLawPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article compares the literary self-presentations in the De vita sua of Gregory of Nazianzus and the Letters of Symmachus as their respective authors responded to public perceptions in Constantinople and Rome, respectively. It reads these works in the light of Gregory’s and Symmachus’ involvement in crisis management at two flashpoints in East–West relations in the last quarter of the fourth century ad, the dispute over the see of Antioch and the rebellion of Gildo in Africa. Both authors, by cooperating with regimes without strong local roots—in the case of Symmachus at the direct request of the regime—had compromised the real or perceived interests of their own cities; both argue in the works in question that they had nonetheless acted in line with locally accepted values and ideals. The Roman empire had long depended on well-connected local elites to mediate between central priorities and local interests in this way, but the sorts of challenges posed by East–West relations in the later fourth century were particularly difficult and the resulting works of self-presentation are both fundamentally novel. These works and the circumstances that led to their creation suggest that successful crisis management between East and West was far from easy, but remained a real possibility as late as the end of the fourth century.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of CanadaSame topicByzantine Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207