Editorializing the Greek Anthology: The palatin manuscript as a collective imaginary
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
The Palatine Anthology (PA) Project, coordinated by the Canada Research Chair on digital textualities directed by Marcello Vitali-Rosati, collaborates with several international partners, including Italian and French schools, in order to establish a collaborative critical digital edition and a multilingual translation of all the PA's epigrams. In particular, our project aims to further develop this edition of the PA, thereby demonstrating the philological, editorial and pedagogic challenges involved in compiling the diverse fragments of this collection of Greek epigrams. Since its discovery in 1606 by Claude Saumaise in the Palatina Library of Heidelberg in Germany , the PA manuscript (Codex Palatinus 23) has considerably influenced literature and art. As we know it today, the Anthology is the result of successive compilations, modifications, additions, and rearrangements by the compilers. Meleager's collection is a collection of epigrams compiled in the first century B.C., which represents the original source of what is known today as the Greek Anthology . This collection, called The Garland, was not randomly arranged, but according to a series of particular organizational principles . The PA challenges the concept of an oeuvre – as a unified and cohesive body of work –, insofar as it brings together 4 000 epigrams written by more than one hundred different authors from over sixteen centuries of literary production (from the Byzantine empire to the 10th century AD). If we cannot consider the Anthology as a unified and cohesive work, how do we account for it in an edition? To these questions, the digital environment presents tools and possibilities allowing us to organize our research, and ultimately work towards finding some answers. In an attempt to provide tangible solutions to the difficulty of assembling such a fragmented body of work the PA Project harnesses digital tools. We have created an open database searchable via an API that allows one to transcribe the manuscript, propose translations, align translations, transcribe scholia, and link epigrams both to each other and to external literary and artistic references. We aim to demonstrate the importance of philological approaches to texts; redefine the boundaries between scholarly and amateur practices; connect contemporary readers and scholars with Classical texts; supplement the Perseus project; and harness the potential of semantic web technologies. We aim to shed light on the many ways to engage with textual objects, to conceive of a multiple reception of the anthological imaginary . The interface of our digital platform does intend for users to propose such reading pathways and weak ties , because it enables them to associate an epigram with a reference (textual, iconographic, musical, cinematographic, and others) and thereby demonstrate a collective engagement with the epigram . This demonstrates how collective imaginaries are able to enrich our understanding of the anthological material. By enabling the users to engage with this otherwise elusive literary object, the Greek epigrams, and with a cultural object, our project enables contemporary readers to engage with the digital possibilities in order to visualize a collective imaginary or topoï , and to contribute to philological research on the origins and influences of the PA .
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it