‘A New Kind of Printing’: Cutting and Pasting a Book for a King at Little Gidding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article describes the harmonized gospel made by the Ferrar family at Little Gidding for King Charles I, c. 1635. This book, one of several of its kind, was made by cutting out printed materials and assembling the pieces into a single, illustrated narrative of the four gospels. The king's book is particularly complex, employing three complementary methods of displaying the harmonized gospel accounts. As with the Ferrars’ other gospel books, it uses images not only of gospel scenes but also of typologically-related Old Testament scenes. The article pays particular attention to the textual materials used in the book. First, it identifies the particular editions used, which include a Cambridge gospel harmony and, surprisingly, an Edinburgh New Testament printed by Robert Young in 1633, the year of Charles's Scottish coronation, suggesting that a courtier or the king himself may have played a part in supplying that edition to the Ferrars. Second, it relates the layout and apparatus of these editions to those of the Little Gidding books, noting that while the Ferrars dismantled one layout to make a new one, their books in important ways take up the textual work of the original editions while adding the meditative affect (and political danger) of Roman Catholic images.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".