Hieronim kot zgodovinar svoje dobe: njegovi pogledi na krizne pojave in zaton Rimskega cesarstva
Bibliographic record
Abstract
V Hieronimovem izjemno obsežnem in raznolikem literarnem opusu zavzema historiografija le skromno mesto. Ob tem pa prinašajo njegova pisma številne zgodovinske podatke in razmišljanja, ki osvetljujejo njegov pogled na sodobnost. Svoje edino v ožjem smislu zgodovinsko delo, Kroniko (oziroma nadaljevanje Evzebijeve Kronike), je zaključil z bitko pri Adrianoplu (378), tako kot največji zgodovinar njegovega časa, pogan Amijan Marcelin. V dogodku, ki je bil ključnega pomena za rimsko cesarstvo, s takojšnjimi katastrofalnimi posledicami v celotnem balkansko-podonavskim delu države, s časovnim zamikom ene generacije pa tudi v Italiji in na Zahodu, je videl začetek konca Rimskega cesarstva. Pri tem je Hieronim kasneje (Ep. 123, 15) uporabil prispodobo potapljajoče se ladje oziroma brodoloma države. Obljube, da bo napisal obširnejšo zgodovino Gracijanove in Teodozijeve dobe mu ni uspelo izpolniti. Med prelomnimi dogodki in procesi, ki jih je ponekod le kratko ocenil, spet drugič pa izpostavil njihovo travmatično vsebino, naj navedemo še dva primera: pohod barbarskih skupin iz srednjega Podonavja in njihov vdor v Galijo 406, ki je zapečatil usodo rimskega Zahoda; pohod Zahodnih Gotov leta 408 v Italijo, zlasti pa gotska osvojitev Rima leta 410, ki ga je izredno pretresla. V zadnjem obdobju njegovega življenja (do 419/420?) so opažanja in razmišljanja zgodovinske vsebine bolj redka, kar je verjetno odraz nastopa bolj stabilnih razmer v rimskem cesarstvu.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".