Undoing Babel: The Tower of Babel in Anglo-Saxon Literature by Tristan Major (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: Undoing Babel: The Tower of Babel in Anglo-Saxon Literature by Tristan Major Jodi Grimes Undoing Babel: The Tower of Babel in Anglo-Saxon Literature. By Tristan Major. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2018. ISBN 978-1-4875-0054-2. Pp. ix + 289. $54.00. Only a few verses comprise the Tower of Babel narrative in the book of Genesis (Gen. 11:1–9), yet along with the Table of Nations (Gen. 10), the account raises significant questions concerning human nature, God's interactions with humanity, technological advance, and socio-linguistic diversity. The story itself tells of a monolingual people building a tower to reach the heavens only to be thwarted by God, who by "confusing" (Gen. 11:7) their language compels them to spread across the earth in new people groups. The text thus explains the presence of the many languages and nations that develop in the postdiluvian world. Undoing Babel reminds readers of an ancient Hebrew narrative that yet retains its relevance as global challenges increasingly require agreement across cultural-linguistic divides. Tristan Major, an assistant professor at Qatar University, analyzes interpretations of the story through the late Anglo-Saxon period. Examining the reception history of the Babel narrative as it peregrinates to Anglo-Saxon England, Major compares its treatments against the source texts and alongside contemporaneous treatments in historical context to explain how and to what effect the story is interpreted over time. In so doing, the book offers readers a delightful overview of the major authors, texts, and events that shape ideology and theological reform from ancient Judea and early Christian Rome to late Anglo-Saxon England. Major begins his book by citing the relevant passages from the English Revised Standard Version-Genesis 9:28–29, 10:1–32, and 11:1–9–and then opens his introduction with Archbishop Wulfstan's well-known diatribe against paganism. Moving chronologically in seven chapters starting with early Jewish and Christian writings, the book ends with a chapter on the Junius 11 manuscript and a conclusion. This study builds on the work of other scholars, notably Arno Borst (Der Turmbau von Babel: Geschichte der Meinungen über Ursprung and Vielfalt der Sprachen und Völker, 4 vols., 1957-1963), Daniel Anlezark (Water and Fire: The Myth of the Flood in Anglo-Saxon England, 2006), Bruce R. O'Brien (Reversing Babel: Translation among the English during an Age of Conquests, c. 800 to c. 1200, 2011), and Andrew Scheil (Babylon under Western Eyes: A Study of Allusion and Myth, 2016). Undoing Babel is unique in that it surveys the Genesis account's reception history through the Anglo-Saxon period. Chapter 1, "Early Jewish and Christian Antiquity," overviews the earliest presentations of the Table of Nations and Babel accounts. Compiled within the first five books of Hebrew Scriptures around 500 BCE (28), the [End Page 457] biblical text "does present a strong sense of land entitlement and illicit encroachment" by Ham's descendants (29), which may be why early Jewish authors focus on tripartite divisions in the nations descending from Noah's three sons. Major examines the Dead Sea Genesis Apocryphon, the book of Jubilees, and Josephus's Antiquitates Iudaicae to demonstrate how these writers emphasize ethnology and geography. Josephus's exegesis, Major observes, "emphasize[s] God's wish for the people to colonize the earth" (37). Moving to Christian writers, Major scrutinizes the work of Tertullian, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, and finally, Augustine, who views "the biblical text as both a literal account that informs the ethnic and linguistic diversity in the world, and an allegorical account that informs the struggle of good and evil in the world" (49). The second chapter, "Latin Christian Antiquity," demonstrates how authors employ the biblical text to forge a Christian identity, to establish Christian connections genealogically to the Jewish people, and in some cases, "to demonize heretical groups or wrong-doers in general" (55). Augustine, stressing the importance of humilitas (69) in contrast to the pride demonstrated at Babel, connects Nimrod with "pride. . . wickedness . . . paganism and heresy" (56). This section also shows how early Christian theologians bookend "the diversity of Babel" with "Pentecostal unity" (66). Pope Gregory, consistent with his...
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 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 ».