La réinvention des Béatitudes dans le Manuel pour mon fils de Dhuoda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this article is to highlight the original way in which Dhuoda uses Christ’s Sermo in monte to express her moral teaching for the benefit of her son’s religious and political upbringing while hinting at politics of her day. In a section of her moral speculum dedicated to the ways of overcoming vices by remembering the 8 beatitudes and living by them, she boldly reinterprets Christ’s sermon while preferring Mathew’s version to Luke’s. Not only does she suppress two beatitudes and add three culled from other biblical sources but she rewrites others, using both the rhetoric of copia and brevitas, so that her son may fashion his aristocratic self according to Christ. Our duchess comments on Old and New Testament texts in private, thus avoiding Saint Paul’s admonishments against women preaching in public. In addition, in a period where earthly happiness is considered inferior to heavenly bliss according to the Augustinian concept of contemptus mundi and contemptus carnis, she appears as a forerunner of the Renaissance where there is room for both.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".