The Stephanephorate of Apollo and the Historical Context of the Milesian Decree for Queen Apama (I.Didyma 480)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soon after the Battle of Ipsos (301 BCE), the Milesians honoured king Seleukos I, his son Antiochos (I), and his wife, queen Apama, in gratitude for promising to rebuild the Apollo temple at Didyma and erecting a stoa. The decrees for Antiochos (I.Didyma 479) and Apama (I.Didyma 480) are largely extant, and the latter provides the chronological anchor for all three honours. It mentions Apollo as , under whom the fi-nancial officials (anataktai) were to procure the funds for the queen’s statue. In the standard edition of the text, Albert Rehm identified this stephanephorate with the year 299/8 BCE, but failed to see that it rather constitutes a terminus ante quem for the decree. The exceptional financial strain on the Milesians may already have resulted in postponing the order of the equestrian statue of Antiochos from perhaps fall 300 BCE to spring 299 BCE. This slightly adjusted timeline invites us to reconsider other aspects of dynastic history under the Diadochs. Contrary to the common opinion, the wedding of Seleukos and Stratonike, the daughter of Demetrios I, in 300 BCE does not constitute a terminus ante quem for honouring Apama, the first wife at a polygamous court, but rather a terminus a quo, since it sealed the reconciliation with Demetrios after the Battle of Ipsos. The Seleukid benefaction should be viewed within the context of a joint peace initiative that Demetrios and Seleukos started from Rhosos. It is also reflected in the mission of Nikagoras of Rhodes to Ephesos (I.Ephesos V 1453). In this context, the Milesian embassy was invited to the Seleukid court, offered the benefactions, and had their fellow citizens respond with three honorific decrees.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".