ALISON KEITH and STEPHEN RUPP (eds). Metamorphosis: The Changing Face of Ovid in Medieval and Early Modern Europe.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As its editors say in the Acknowledgments, this collection originated in ‘the Toronto-wide Arts Festival on the theme of “Metamorphoses”’ (p. 7) in 2004–2005. Whilst the scope of the festival gestures towards interdisciplinary, even multi-media, approaches to the concept of change, most of the essays in this useful collection are straightforward readings of literature; two contributions explore the Ovidian representations in visual arts. The fifteen essays in this volume chart the reception history of Metamorphoses as a book, or of the individual myths from it, from antiquity to the Middle Ages and the early modern period. The essays explore the varied meanings Metamorphoses produced in its afterlife since it first appeared in 8 CE, focusing on literatures written in several vernacular languages; engaging with such topics as demonology, incest, alchemy, sensory faculties, gender, sexuality, rhetoric (and rhetorical figures), reading, selfhood, religion and manuscript transmission; and considering Christine de Pizan, Chaucer, Gower, Cervantes, Petrarch, Góngora, Milton, Spenser and Reginald Scot. Although the continuity of the ‘varied reception history’ (p. 15) is the overarching guiding principle for the volume as a whole, the authors of individual essays employ a variety of approaches, confidently and competently going down some well-trodden, but solid and safe, methodological routes, rather than charting new critical directions. Overall, the essays engage with palaeography, philology, historicism and comparativism, in analyses that are clear and free of jargon, and in theory-free arguments. The authors explore in more depth most of the familiar and most compelling myths, while also touching upon the myths which were less-frequently used in the pre-modern period.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".