Epigraphy and the Greek Historian. ("Phoenix" Supplementary Volumes 47) by Craig Cooper
Bibliographic record
Abstract
434 PHOENIX ou « lecteur idéal » et se réfère à l'« univers poétique », notion incontestablement Eée au concept des mondes possibles. Bien qu'elle situe son projet à côté des théories dites contemporaines, elle s'appuie sur des concepts connus depuis déjà quelques décennies ; c'est donc à la fois en niant l'écho d'une certaine théorie dans sa problématique et en intégrant ses prêts-à-penserdans son propos, qu'elle met en relief quelques présupposés fondamentaux de son travail. La même attitude vis-à-vis de la théorie est particulièrement évidente dans l'établissement d'un corpus mixte, philosophique (Aristote) et littéraire (Euripide et Théocrite). Cette combinaison — à mon avis légitime et avec un potentiel qui ne reste pas inexploité — ne peut se fonder que sur la mise en relief de la dimension précisément méta-littéraire aussi bien d'un traité « théorique » et d'un texte « artistique ». Hélène et Idylles, loin d'être vus comme de simples illustrations de l'autonomie de l'imaginaire, peuvent être lus — et d'une manière le sont déjà — comme des textes initiant une nouvelle attitude vis-à-vis de la poétique. En somme, l'étude de Frazier aurait pu mieux mettre en évidence ses mérites indiscutables en tirant meilleur profit de ses points d'appui implicites et, par là, en abordant la façon dont la philosophie et la littérature pensent la construction d'un « nouveau monde » au lieu de se limiter à sa « découverte ». Université de Chypre Apostolos Lampropoulos Epigraphy and the Greek Historian. Edited by Craig Cooper. Toronto: University of Toronto Press (Phoenix Supplementary Volumes 47). 2008. Pp. xvii, 197. Epigraphy has traditionally served as the handmaiden of history, political history in particular. So notes Craig Cooper in his introductory chapter, but the papers that follow are intended to illustrate a broader range of historical questions on which Greek inscriptions can shed light. They are also brought together to honor Phillip Harding, Professor of Ancient History at the University of British Columbia, best known for his work on the Atthidographers, Attic oratory, and his translations of inscriptions and other primary sources in the second volume of the Translated Documents of Greece and Rome series. The papers achieve both purposes superbly: a fitting tribute to their honorand, their contents also reflect many of the ways in which historians today utilize epigraphic material. The volume is divided into two parts. After a general introduction Part One features five papers focusing on Athens. David Mirhady begins with a discussion of the inscribed copy of the law of Drakon on homicide {IG I3 104). He proposes that the verb pheugein, which appears in the first sentence of the law, does not require the killer to go into exile, as is normally believed. Rather, it means that he is to stand trial as a defendant, a usage well-attested in sources of classical date. The law's opening sentence thus represents the first in a series of steps designed not to punish a killer but to effect reconciliation between him and the family of the victim. Next Craig Cooper discusses several fragmentary inscriptions related to Athens' relations with Keos in the fourth century, including a treaty proposed by Aristophon in 363/2 (IGII2 111). His goal is to see what they can reveal about Hypereides' prosecution of Aristophon (frs. 40-44) for the settlement he imposed on the island. Political and military history also form the subject of a paper by David Whitehead, who considers possible evidence- for Athenian military activity in Sicily during the fourth century. He accepts the suggestion of W. K. Pritchett (advisor of the volume's honorand) that Isaios 6.1 refers to an otherwise unattested Athenian expedition to Sicily in the 360s, but he rejects, on epigraphic grounds, Pritchett's association of IG II2 283 with that same BOOK REV1EWS/COMPTES RENDUS 435 campaign.1 That inscription must refer to other activity, also not attested elsewhere, in Sicily in the 340s or 330s. Kathryn Simonsen also seeks to understand an inscription in its historical setting...
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".