MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002087969 · doi:10.1353/cat.2011.0025

Journey of Five Capuchin Nuns (review)

2011· article· en· W2002087969 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth A. Lehfeldt

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œCatholic historical review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEarly Modern Women Writers
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdventureMonasticismNarrativeHistoryThe RenaissanceClassicsArtArt historyAncient historyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Journey of Five Capuchin Nuns Elizabeth A. Lehfeldt Journey of Five Capuchin Nuns. By Madre María Rosa. Edited and translated by Sarah E. Owens. [The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series.] (Toronto: Iter and Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies. 2009. Pp. viii, 212. $17.00 paperback. ISBN 978-0-772-72050-4.) Sarah E. Owens’s edited translation of the Journey of Five Capuchin Nuns provides an enlightening glimpse into the experiences of early-modern religious women. This lively narrative gives voice to a group of adventurous nuns who were far from passive and cloistered. From the pen of María Rosa, a Capuchin nun of the early-eighteenth century, comes a candid and fascinating account of her and her sisters’ efforts to found a Capuchin convent in Peru. Among other adventures, the women traveled from Madrid to southern Spain, were captured by the Dutch (one of Spain’s enemies at the time), and made a harrowing journey across the Andes. Battling sickness and the elements, and supported by a network of ecclesiastical patronage, the nuns succeeded in transporting their model of female monasticism to the far reaches of Spain’s empire. Owens has provided an engaging translation and helpful introductory notes. This translation will be of interest to a broad range of scholars including those interested in early-modern nuns and the participation of women in the Atlantic world of trade and travel. Several features make this text distinctive. The first, as Owens notes, is that it was not written at the urging of a male ecclesiastic. Rather, María Rosa wrote for her fellow nuns in Madrid, who desired an account of their sisters’ [End Page 375] efforts. Although composed, then, as a travel narrative, the text is nonetheless infused with María Rosa’s particular objectives: to defend her monastic endeavor and the superiority of Spanish Catholicism and empire. She consistently upholds the Capuchin model of devout austerity. She is critical, for example, of convents in which they lodged where the nuns wore elaborate habits and lived in luxurious buildings. In recounting their capture at the hands of the Dutch, she highlights the religious barbarity of their captors (they profaned an image of St. Joseph), while suggesting that they were impressed by the nuns’ vow of poverty. The account is also significant because it provides a distinct perspective on the world of Spain’s imperial expansion. Writing both as a woman and a professed religious, María Rosa has added an important voice to our understanding of the Atlantic world. In the introduction, for example, Owens makes a compelling argument for her familiarity with other accounts of the “new” world, especially José de Acosta’s Natural and Moral History of the Indies (1590). Yet as a nun, she also saw this world through a distinctive lens. Along the route in South America to their final destination in Lima, Peru, for example, the nuns encountered curious crowds wanting to meet them. Far from typical circumstances where visiting parlors with partitions would separate the nuns from secular society, the women instead had to cover their faces when engaging in conversation. The translation would be an excellent text to use with undergraduates. The nuns who emerge from these pages—devout, brave, and willing to enjoy a good laugh—will defy stereotypes and prompt a reconsideration of the role of religious women beyond the cloister. Elizabeth A. Lehfeldt Cleveland State University Copyright © 2011 The Catholic University of America Press

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œCatholic historical reviewSame topicEarly Modern Women WritersFrench-language works237,207