The Idea of Anglo-Saxon England 1066–1901: RRemembering, Forgetting, Deciphering, and Renewing the Past, by John D. Niles
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
From the gossipy, and occasionally salacious, accounts of pre-Conquest England produced by historians of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, to the records of the inspectors tasked with demolishing England’s monastic establishment in the sixteenth, to the vibrant exchanges that ricocheted back and forth in the pages of society magazines in the nineteenth, the Anglo-Saxons were rarely too far from the popular and academic imaginations in the millennium that followed the Conquest of 1066. This interest was motivated by a range of factors: alongside antiquarian and scholarly curiosity, political and religious controversies, and even nineteenth-century racial theory (explored by the author, John D. Niles, in two fascinating chapters at the end of this book) all played their part in maintaining the Anglo-Saxons’ relevance. The modern Anglo-Saxonist’s interest in the more recent past, however, has been intensified by the effects of a single, devastating event which took place on 23 October 1731. That night, the ominously-named Ashburnham House, where the vast manuscript collection of Sir Robert Cotton (1571–1631) was kept, suffered a major fire, which tore through the library, destroying or damaging about a quarter of the manuscripts housed there. As a result, the transcripts and editions made of such works as ‘Beowulf’ (which was badly singed in places) and ‘The Battle of Maldon’ (which was completely destroyed) by early modern scholars, who saw them before the fire, have become essential to our understanding of those texts. Just as the historian or the literary critic might interrogate the palaeographical and codicological features of an Anglo-Saxon manuscript, or speculate about the backgrounds of Anglo-Saxon authors, so has it been necessary to subject the training, mentality and scholarly methods of these later collectors and transcribers to close scrutiny in order to focus more sharply the lens through which we, in the twenty-first century, are compelled to view our subjects. There is, therefore, a very great need for a book such as this, which charts the transmission and reception of Anglo-Saxon history and literature across the centuries in a single, highly accessible work.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».