MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1966047921 · doi:10.1353/utq.0.0191

Cross Culture and Faith: The Life and Work of James Mellon Menzies (review)

2008· article· en· W1966047921 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
David Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFaithShang dynastyCultSkepticismChinaPhilosophyChristianityEnlightenmentBiographyAlchemyHistoryArtLiteratureTheologyClassicsArt historyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Cross Culture and Faith: The Life and Work of James Mellon Menzies David Curtis Wright Linfu Dong . Cross Culture and Faith: The Life and Work of James Mellon Menzies. University of Toronto Press 2005. viii, 329. $65.00 This is a painstakingly, lovingly executed biography of James Mellon Menzies (1885–1957), a gifted and intense Canadian missionary and accomplished scholar whose religious imagination was inspired by a singular conviction: that God had personally led him to the Ruins of Yin in China and willed him to study and collect the 'oracle bones' found there, or the mysterious engraved and cracked bones (mostly the shoulder blades of cattle or tortoise shells) used during Shang times (ca. 1600–1056 BCE) as part of a divinatory cult for communicating with the supernatural realm. On the oracle bones were engraved some of the most ancient Chinese writing in existence. [End Page 332] Menzies was convinced that the deity Shangdi named on many of the carefully preserved and buried Shang oracle bones could, at least conceptually, be equated with the one true God. For him this was tremendously exciting because it meant that Christianity could be indigenized in China. If the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob could be shown from the most ancient of Chinese documents to be the God of the Chinese as well, he reasoned, then skeptics such as Hu Shi and Feng Youlan, who argued that the Chinese historically have been a philosophical rather than a religious people, would be proven wrong and the cause of the Christian gospel in China would be greatly advanced, although neither Menzies nor his modern Chinese biographer ever bothered to elaborate much on the specific particulars of exactly how and why this would happen. The first hundred pages cover Menzies' youth in rural Ontario, his Christian faith, his arrival in China in 1910 on the eve of the revolution that overthrew China's last dynasty, Qing (1644–1912), and an interim period of military service in France from 1917 to 1920 with a group of non-combatant Chinese labourers sent to Europe to aid the Allied cause during and after the First World War. China's revolutions, upheavals, and wars rumble in the background (and sometimes the foreground) of Menzies' life in China, but not until page 109 do we get to the meat, or rather the bones, of the book. The announcement that Menzies had collected 50, 000 oracle-bone fragments by 1927 comes suddenly, like a bolt out of the blue, and so does the account of how he felt God had led him to the Ruins of Yin in 1914 and his publication of a book on the oracle bones in 1917. Where did Menzies' ideas about the oracle bones come from? As Dong indicates at least twice, the equation of Shangdi with God was not original to Menzies; Jesuits in China during the seventeenth century also made the connection. So did Menzies ever credit them? It is quite unlikely that Menzies would have been unaware of the Jesuits' speculations on the Shangdi question, so his seeming silence is baffling. Of course, it would be unreasonable to fault Dong for not answering this question if Menzies was indeed silent on it, but Dong's failure even to consider it is a bit surprising. Additionally, scholarship by David Mungello and others shows that during the seventeenth century there were robust discussions and debates between Jesuits and Chinese scholar-officials about the appropriateness of the Shangdi/God equation. Menzies' style seems, in fact, Jesuitical in some ways, given his intense dedication, fine scholarship in the service of faith, and belief that Christianity could and should accommodate itself culturally to the Chinese scene. Menzies is known to Shang specialists as a competent scholar, but Dong's book is very worthwhile because of its sensitivity, insight, and [End Page 333] reminder to us that Menzies was a convinced Christian. His Christian faith informed and coloured all aspects of his life, including his three career roles as collector for the Chinese people (as opposed to collecting for himself and his own profit), archaeologist, and (above all) evangelical theorist who believed firmly that Christianity could and...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→