Bibliographic record
Abstract
190 PHOENIX than a sustained examination of inscriptions in Latin elegy. Discussion of Amores 1.11, for example, is an interesting interpretation that pays many dividends, but her attempt to establish a connection between Ovid's dedication of his writing tablets to Venus, the character of Nape, and Roman slavery frequently strains to show its links to the inserted inscription. Ramsby's exploration of the relationship between Ovid's prayer for a safe Corinna in Amores 2.13-14 and his anxiety regarding the writing of elegy in the contemporary political climate likewise often fails to remain tethered to the accompanying three-word inscription. Moreover, in her discussion of the Amores, and indeed throughout the book, Ramsby is perhaps a little too content to ground her thesis about the close relationship between the literary and real-world application of inscriptions with reference to how Romans used them to evoke and achieve permanence, memorialization, and self-display. These broad categories also frequently underpin the use of inscriptions in other cultures, however, and as a result it remains a little cloudy as to how often the use of inscriptions by the elegists is distinctively or uniquely Roman. Ramsby's engagement with the social and political relevance of literary inscriptions continues in her discussion of the Metamorphoses in the sixth and final chapter of the book. Of particular interest in this chapter is the employment of inscriptions by characters traditionally marginalized or lacking status and power. Ramsby reviews the inscriptions contained within the tales of Phaethon, Caieta, and Iphis, for example, and with the latter uncovers connections with both the threats to male power during the Augustan period and the ongoing process of Romanization. Similarly, in Propertius, the use of epigraphic elements by women such as Cynthia, Arethusa, and Cornelia in poems 4.3, 4.7, and 4.11, for instance, is typical of Roman practice in that they strive to establish memorial and permanence. But Ramsby also demonstrates how they can be read as reactions against the policies of the new regime, and also how they are interconnected with moves on the part of the elegists to secure their own immortality and establish their position in society at a time when other forms of literary production were in perhaps greater favour. Many of these readings are invigorating and, for the most part, convincing, although occasionally the discussion exhibits a shortcoming common in studies that attempt to integrate literature and history, in that some of the connections drawn demand fuller development. Ramsby's attempt to secure the interpretation of inscriptions in elegy within their Roman context is welcome and needed. This important perspective, however, still demands a more thorough engagement with the social and political developments of the late republic and early principate, and a more precise consideration of the specific functions of inscriptions for Romans and Italians. But this is a good book, and Ramsby is to be commended for her fresh insight into a well studied selection of poems. Campion College, University of Regina David Meban Statius' Thebaid and the Poetics of Civil War. By Charles McNelis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2007. Pp. x , 203. Studying Statius no longer requires an apology: in the four recent monographs in English and the surging tide of articles, there is a sense of a new orthodoxy on Statius emerging (a poet secure in his self-confidence, challenging his predecessors). I should begin by stating unequivocally that this is an excellent book which demands and deserves close reading and engagement: a balanced, stimulating, and original interpretation of the BOOK REVTEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 191 Thebaid. It is a shame that all this work on Statius came at the same time, leading to some duplication and less engagement with the ideas of others than might be ideal. The distinctive offering of McNelis's book, despite its rather uninformative title, is his take on the Thebaid's use of Callimachus and Callimacheanism. For a thorough, detailed, and thoughtful exploration of all possible echoes of Callimachus and Callimachean material in Statius' Thebaid, we nefed look no further. McNelis presents a reading of the Thebaid as a text riven by conflicting poetic agendas, along the lines of Jamie Masters's...
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".