MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985671447 · doi:10.7202/1026571ar

The Freemasons, the Temple, and the Lost Ark

2014· article· en· W1985671447 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jay Macpherson

Bibliographic record

VenueLumen Selected Proceedings from the Canadian Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligious Studies and Spiritual Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTempleHistoryAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper sets out to explore the interest of Freemasons, mainly English, in King Solomon's Temple during the first half of the eighteenth century, through engravings of the period.The 1740s engravings shown are from France, where English Freemasonry had arrived about 1725; they cover a period when English Masons, alarmed by the appearance in 1730 of a significant exposure, published very little.Through much of the century before 1717 the Freemasons were growing away from the old craftsmen's guild of stonemasons, becoming to outward appearance just an early gentlemen's club.They existed independently in various centres in England, Scotland, and less certainly Ireland.What gave them a common banner (until 1717 when four old London lodges joined to form a Grand Lodge), was not a central organization but a shared tradition.They carried over from their craft some symbols, some legends, and some rituals, these last concerned almost exclusively with initiating members and then advancing them to further grades.They brought also some vocabulary, notably the word "lodge," which means both the group and its meeting-place.The guild had only two grades, Entered Apprentice and "Master or Fellowcraft": "Master" was reserved for a Fellowcraft, a fully trained stoneworker who had set up as an employer of his fellows, and also for the elected head of the local assembly or lodge, but by 1730 "Master" had been added as a third grade.While all the ceremonies question the candidate on the lore of Masonry and culminate in his taking an oath of secrecy and receiving a password, the third degree

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0180.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.211 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLumen Selected Proceedings from the Canadian Society for Eighteenth-Century StudiesSame topicReligious Studies and Spiritual PracticesFrench-language works237,207