MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037869633

Ulysse chez Éole : Éole, ἀποπομπη et θέμις

2019· article· fr· W3037869633 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gabriela Cursaru

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Études Classiques · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resume . —  La mer et les vents agissent en complicite, tous deux relevant des dieux seuls. Leur action est declenchee et orientee par des divinites qui s’en servent comme moyen d’action a distance, soit pour aller au secours des mortels, soit pour les punir. Cet article se propose d’eclaircir, a partir de l’episode homerique de la visite d’Ulysse chez Eole, la maniere dont la mer et les vents peuvent agir a titre d’agents divins dont le deferlement est un signe de la volonte des dieux qui s’ex­prime ainsi. Figure divine « primitive » dont l’autorite se limite au controle des vents, Eole n’a pas de puissance de jugement ni de decision de rapatriement (ἀποπομπή) d’Ulysse, dont le droit de rentrer chez lui grace au secours divin est de­fini par rapport a la θέμις. Eole se contente de respecter la volonte des dieux a l’egard du heros et les injonctions qui lui ont ete faites via les signes divins. Tant que les dieux s’opposent au retour d’Ulysse, ainsi que leur sentence s’est exprimee au moyen de la δυναμις specifique des elements auxquels ils commandent, a savoir les vents et l’element aquatique, Eole n’a pas le droit (θέμις) d’aider ni de rapatrier (αποπέμπω) un homme hai par les Immortels ou des mortels dont les actes d’impiete sont susceptibles de nuire a la justice divine et a l’ordre cosmique. Abstract . —  Both the seawater and the winds fall within the competence and sphere of responsibility of the gods. They activate their potency, initiate and control their action, and use them as remote tools to both provide help and punish the mortals. In this article, I wish to consider the way in which, in the Homeric episode of Odysseus’ visit to Aeolus, the seawater and the winds, acting in full complicity in the middle of the storm, serve to signify the will of the gods and their sentences. ‘Primitive’ religious figure whose authority is limited to the control of the winds, Aeolus has neither power of judgment nor of decision to further Odysseus on his way home. Odysseus’ right of νόστος thanks to the divine help is defined with re­spect to the θέμις. Therefore, Aeolus only respects the will of the gods with regard to the hero and their divine injunctions made through signs. As long as the gods oppose the return of Odysseus, as their sentence was expressed through the δύναμις specific to the elements they command, i.e. the winds and the aquatic elements, Aeolus does not have the right (θέμις) to help or send upon his way (ἀποπέμπω) a man abhorred by heaven, nor mortals whose impious acts are susceptible of harming the divine justice and the cosmic order. Gabriela CURSARU Universite de Montreal gabriela.cursaru@gmail.com

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.285 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Études ClassiquesSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207