The Science of Roman History: Biology, Climate, and the Future of the Roman Past by Walter Scheidel
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
176 PHOENIX finesse of Schlapbach’s philological reading, as well as her capacity to situate each passage within a broader cultural, literary, and philosophical tradition, without overlooking the aesthetic possibilities of dance analysis. Chapter Four (“[Perceived] Authenticity and the Physical Presence,” 169–200) explores aspects of credibility and visual impression associated with dance re-enactments in Xenophon’s Symposium and in Greek and Roman epigrams from the imperial period. Here the balance between accuracy—that is, the dancer’s excessively literal portrayal of a myth or a character—and lack of art reminds us of the aesthetic principles of pantomime as a quintessentially representational art form. Chapter Five (“Dance and Interpretation in Longus and Apuleius,” 201–249) shows how the ancient novel continues Platonic reflections on mimesis. Particularly interesting in this chapter is the idea that dance may shape social roles by grafting mythical patterns onto reality, a process that Schlapbach investigates through Daphnis and Chloe’s pastoral pantomime in Longus’ Book 2. The final chapter of this section (Chapter Six, “Elusive Dancers and the Limits of Art in Nonnus ’ Dionysiaka,” 251–281) exemplifies the essence of Schlapbach’s whole book by showing the relevance of dance as an inspirational force also in the Christian environment of Nonnus’ Dionysiaka. Here, the author reads the epic through a multimedia analysis and recognizes dance as a way for the poem to draw attention to itself. The most remarkable contribution of this chapter is Schlapbach’s identification of non-representational dance as an aesthetic paradigm, of significance to the poet’s imaginary as the most traditional and purely mimetic forms of dance. Thus, in a section that describes the transformation of a mythical dancer into a river, Schlapbach foregrounds the corporeal and the essentially formal in order to elaborate on the interpretative possibilities of these kinds of performances , their “self-sufficient” nature, and their artistic appeal. Suddenly at this point we understand the importance of the book’s unusual jacket photograph, for it is this ideal of pure movement and its physical dimension—what Cunningham so brilliantly extricated from the practice and experience of dance—that Schlapbach seeks to recast. The book then concludes with a brief theoretical epilogue (283–288) and a thorough bibliography (289–328) that reflects the rigor of the author’s multifaceted and impressively multilingual academic profile. As a whole, The Anatomy of Dance Discourse provides the reader with an immersive experience in the dynamic world of body movement, in no small measure thanks to Schlapbach’s fluid writing style and her willingness to summarize and rethink each idea in useful Protean ways. With this monograph, we are invited to evaluate the significance of dance in antiquity as more than an isolated art form and to acknowledge the manysided effects of this cultural reality. The overarching discourse of ancient dance has only just started to permeate the field. Universidad Aut onoma de Madrid Zoa Alonso Fern andez The Science of Roman History: Biology, Climate, and the Future of the Roman Past. Edited by Walter Scheidel. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 2018. Pp. xvi, 259. This book, edited by Walter Scheidel, presents different scientific approaches relevant to the Roman past. Rather than forming a handbook or a manual on the historical applications of science, the contributions are united instead around their focus on what BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 177 new light each approach might shed on historical inquiry. The whole thus functions as an invitation for Romanists to engage with new scientific methodologies and findings. There can be no denying the possibilities on display here for expanding the horizons of our understanding of the ancient world. Anyone whose work crosses into the field of Roman social and economic history will find value in this book, and many readers are likely to come away with new ideas for research projects. As the authors of one chapter note (154), ancient historians have largely stayed on the sidelines while scientific techniques are increasingly incorporated into the historical study of other periods of the past. Such lack of interest might be attributed to our familiarity with using more conventional source materials. What has changed in recent years is not the value of this existing...
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 it