Love as Persuasion in Monteverdi’s ‘L’incoronazione di Poppea’: New Thoughts on the Authorship Question
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Focusing primarily upon Poppea’s transgressive rhetoric, which manoeuvres both inside and outside ideologies of the feminine in Monteverdi’s L’incoronazione di Poppea, this article has two main objectives: first, to situate the gender confusion at the heart of the Poppea–Nerone relationship within the context of the sexually double nature of Renaissance rhetoric and, secondly, to locate these findings within the much broader issue of ‘Who wrote the music to L’incoronazione di Poppea?’ Arguing for an alternative composer or composers for the Finale, I suggest that the patriarchal retribution witnessed here in the form of Nerone’s musical empowerment, when coupled with the affective nature of the final love duet, ‘Pur ti miro’, postulates a rhetorical outlook significantly at odds with the opera as a whole.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".