Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dionysius I, tyrant of Syracuse from 405 to 367 B.C., though arguably the most significant personage of Greek history from Pericles to Philip of Macedon, has not received favourable notices from modern his torians.This situation largely derives from the fact that in classical antiquity, a hostile anecdotal tradition sprang up, already in the fourth century and during the tyrant's own lifetime, which essentially took two forms, emphasizing either the tyrant's cruelty to his friends and family or his oppression of the Syracusans and Siceliots of his Empire.In the 3rd century BC, much of this material was incorporated into the hostile testimony of Timaeus of Tauromenium and hence found its way into a host of extant scattered later material such as Athenaeus, Plutarch and Cicero, to name the most conspicuous examples, from whose accounts modern historians have culled their data.(Diodorus, our chief source for Dionysius' reign, I should emphasize in parentheses, in my opinion was relatively immune to influence from this genre of information). IITo evaluate the validity of this data, we must explore its origins, and, to do so, we must consider Dionysius' cultural aims.The tyrant was certainly a man of no mean intellectual accomplishment.Well educated from youth, he was by profession a scribe (Cicero, Tusc.5.22.63;Dem.20.161; Diod.13.96.4;45.66.5;Polyaen.5.22) and his début into politics reveals that he was possessed of considerable rhetorical powers (Diod.13.91-92).Musical and medical interests are attributed to Dionysius (Cic.Tusc.5.22.63;Aelian, V.H. 40.11).Among his acquaintances are to be included the philosopher historian Aristippus of Cyrene (Diog.Laert.2. 73; 83), the historian Philistus (Jacoby, Fr.Gr.Hist.Ill, No. 556, T1A,
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".