MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060625357 · doi:10.1353/sib.0.0004

Verses in Sermons Again: The Case of Cambridge, Jesus College, MS Q.A.13

2005· article· en· W2060625357 on OpenAlex
Ralph Hanna

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in bibliography · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFolioContext (archaeology)ScholarshipHistoryClassicsQuarter (Canadian coin)LiteraturePresentation (obstetrics)ArtArt historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Verses in Sermons Again: The Case of Cambridge, Jesus College, MS Q.A.13 Ralph Hanna (bio) Even ninety years after the fact, Carleton Brown’s contributions to the study of the early English lyric remain monumental. Not only did he produce the only attempts at comprehensive, historically conceived editions of many texts (primarily short religious verse), but through his extensive bibliographical efforts he largely set the agenda followed by all subsequent scholarship. Whatever the limitations I will discuss below, his immense investment in the manuscript record of short verse and in its presentation to the scholarly community in organised form cannot be faulted. Brown’s great monument, actually the second of his major bibliographical contributions, is Index of Middle English Verse, which appeared in 1943. Co-authored with Rossell H. Robbins, at the time a Cambridge graduate, it was the culmination of a quarter century of work.1 Brown had begun surveying verse in manuscripts before the first World War—at a time when large numbers of texts were known only ‘accidentally’, on the basis of their presentation in print from a single copy. Moreover, in the absence of comprehensive modern catalogues and indexes, knowledge of library collections was equally haphazard. In this context, Brown went about the task of finding Middle English texts with considerable rigour. He did not try to survey everything but generally limited himself to manuscripts he believed would include English. But within these limits, he made reasonably scrupulous folio-by-folio surveys of numerous selected books. Further, he relied on similar surveys from correspondents he believed trustworthy (e.g. Col. R. B. Haselden, curator of manuscripts at the Huntington Library) for information about collections he could not visit personally. His exemplary manuscript bibliography, however partial its survey, performed an extremely useful service by demonstrating, most particularly to North American scholars who lacked continuous access to the British archive, precisely where verse of all sorts might be found. One of Brown’s greatest supports in his search for verse was provided by past manuscript cataloguers. Preeminent here was the greatest manuscript scholar of the early twentieth century, M. R. James, who had carefully described nearly all the manuscripts in Cambridge college libraries in a series of magisterial catalogues. As James saw, in a customarily informative description, Cambridge, Jesus [End Page 63] College, MS Q.A.13 (his MS 13) is a composite manuscript of sermons, at least portions of Franciscan origin.2 Latter parts of the book are joined by a medieval foliation (not replaced by any modern one). This begins at modern fol. 60, and one set of Latin sermons in double columns, copied in the second half of the fourteenth century, ends on medieval fol. 33v, fol. 91v in the continuous modern foliation (which shortly ceases). This is succeeded by a set of sermons in long lines, written in what an English palaeographer would describe as a secretary bookhand of the mid fifteenth century; these sermons cover the medieval folios 34–149v, with folios 149v–157v (the end of the manuscript) a table of topics treated in them. The volume’s second, fifteenth-century set of sermons may well represent a collection from diverse sources. But within this section of the book, James noted English bits on folios containing a consecutive block of three sermons: 1. Fols 79v–83v: ‘Ingredere ciuitatem Actuum 9[:6] et in epistola hodierna Reuerendi mei dicit Egidius De regimine . . .’, for inclaustrating a recluse; 2. Fols 83v–90v: ‘Quid fecit quare morietur, primo Regum 20[:cf. 32] Wat hath ye man do yat he schal dy3e 3oo [l. þoo] Karissimi narrat Augustinus 10o. De ciuitate dei capitulo 19. . . .’, for Good Friday; 3. Fols 90v–94v: ‘Tv es qui venturus es Matthei 11[:3] Karissimi Virgilius 6o. Eneidorum docet quod tria principaliter requiruntur in rege . . .’, for (?the first Sunday in) Advent? As is customary in books of this sort, the English, which inspection proves to be rhymed verse, has been written consecutively within the Latin prose of the sermons. Within these sermons, the scribe copies seven separate sets of verses. Following James’s notice, Brown surveyed the...

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.241 · 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