MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889192726 · doi:10.25446/oxford.13915016

E07546: Sophronius of Jerusalem, in his Miracles of the Saints Cyrus and John, recounts how *Kyros and Ioannes/Cyrus and John (physician and soldier, martyrs of Egypt, S00406) healed and converted two heretics, followers of the sect of Theodosius and Severus, at their shrine at Menouthis (near Alexandria, Lower Egypt). Written in Greek in Alexandria, 610/615.

2019· other· en· W6889192726 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Oxford · 2019
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDreamPropositionWifeWorshipMysticismSectQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sophronius of Jerusalem, The Miracles of Saints Cyrus and John, 39<br><br>Summary:<br><br>There was a certain Petros from the village (ktema) of Herakleion which was located fourteen stadia from the sanctuary of the martyrs [Cyrus and John]. He was a follower of the sect of Theodosius and Severus. This man suffered severely from paralysis. He sought the martyrs’ aid and went to their temple. They appeared to him in a dream and asked him if he wanted to be delivered from the terrible disease. Since he nodded, they commanded him to get up and go to Jordan (which was the name of the baptismal pool given by the Alexandrians because the Saviour was baptised in the river Jordan for our redemption). He was then to wash his hands and by this gesture represent the consumption of the vivifying flesh and blood of Christ. <br><br>But the man said that this proposition was bad and cursed the Council of Chalcedon. The martyrs warned him that he would not regain his health and then they withdrew, bringing back his pains that they had calmed before. Petros, since he suffered terrivly, invoked the martyrs again. When they returned, they renewed their proposition, but this time also he rejected it. He did it not only twice or thrice, but many times he invoked their aid. Every time they came and offered the same, but he always dismissed them. At last, exhausted by enormous pains, he agreed to obey the martyrs’ orders. However, he asked them why they followed the beliefs of the Council of Chalcedon. They replied that the belief defined by the Council of Chalcedon was orthodox and it was a doctrine of divine inspiration. Petros who was already convicted by the severity of his pains, executed the martyrs’ orders and regained health as a salary for his piety.<br><br>Whereas Menas, an Alexandrian who was a secretary (notarios) of Christodoros, the manager of the sanctuary, shared the same heresy with Petros. He partook of communion after an overt flagellation. When he was sleeping, he saw that the saints were directing him towards the precious hierateion and the sacred table. When they saw, however, that he was not following them, they returned and, pummelling him, ordered that he obey their commands and communicate like them. However, despite many severe blows, he remained unpersuaded, the martyrs began to threaten him and eventually left him alone. Then he began to suffer as from true wounds which made him get up and take communion. Afterwards he was delivered from the pains.<br><br>Text: Fernández Marcos 1976, lightly modified in the light of Gascou 2007. Summary: J. Doroszewska.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of OxfordFrench-language works237,207