MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2089780167 · doi:10.1353/esc.2007.0101

Imperial Bibles, Domestic Bodies: Women, Sexuality, and Religion in the Victorian Market (review)

2006· article· en· W2089780167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joy Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish studies in Canada · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualitySubject (documents)HistoryRelation (database)LiteratureArtSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Imperial Bibles, Domestic Bodies: Women, Sexuality, and Religion in the Victorian Market Joy Dixon Mary Wilson Carpenter. Imperial Bibles, Domestic Bodies: Women, Sexuality, and Religion in the Victorian Market. Athens, Ohio: Ohio UP, 2003. xxii + 206 pp. ISBN: 0-8214-1515-8. $39.95 US. The Victorian "Family Bible with Notes" was, according to Mary Wilson Carpenter, a "uniquely British institution," first prompted by restrictions on the printing of the Bible in Britain and its colonies. From the early eighteenth to the late nineteenth century the publication of Bibles with notes and commentary allowed printers to avoid restrictions on the printing of the King James or Authorized Version. Printers added engravings and illustrations and sold these Bibles in inexpensive serial editions which, Carpenter argues, are "an important resource for learning how British families read their bibles, or how their bibles read them, interpellating them as certain kinds of 'authorized version' subjects" (xv-xvi). Carpenter traces three phases in the development of the family Bible. The earliest family Bibles—which appeared in the first half of the eighteenth century—promoted themselves as a source of "universal knowledge," providing notes and commentary that attempted to make the whole contents of the Bible (including the story of Sodom and Gomorrah and other [End Page 203] similar passages) accessible and intelligible to all members of the family. As Carpenter puts it, "Commentary on what is marginalized in relation to the 'family' … suggests that the homosexual subject was even better known than studies of molly houses have proposed." Texts such as The Compleat History of the Old and New Testament; or, A Family Bible, with … annotations, extracted from the writings of the most celebrated authors (first published in 1735) not only provided frank discussions of sodomy and effeminacy but also exhibited a fascination with transgressive and undomesticated womanhood that would have been remarkable even in secular publications of the time (17, 20–21). By the early nineteenth century, however, some parts of the Bible came to be considered as unsuitable for family reading. Certain passages were bracketed off or printed in smaller type, with the instruction that they were "To be omitted from family reading." Biblical knowledge was divided between that which was appropriate for the family and that which was to be confined to the "closet," or study by the head of the household: "These Family Bibles market access to the power of secret knowledge, to be the exclusive possession of a privileged family member, typically specified as the 'Master of the family'" (xx, 8). As the century progressed, however, British Family Bibles demonstrate[d] more and more consciousness of feminine tastes: the frontispieces of patriarchal figures so common in eighteenth century bibles—the "author" of the bible, Moses with the tablets of the Law, or Jesus as princely dispenser of mercy—are replaced by representations of Moses as a baby, far too chubby to float in his wicker basket, or the boy Samuel kneeling in his little nightshirt to say his prayers. (56) Drawing on well over a hundred examples of family Bibles, spanning the period from 1690 to 1886, Carpenter begins to develop a number of suggestive arguments. In addition to her exploration of gender and sexuality she also (as the book's title suggests) places these Bibles in an "imperial" context. One important result of the "bracketing" or "closeting" of certain passages was to mark out much of the sexually explicit material (such as the stories of Sodom or Onan, or Levitical texts on bodily practices) as matters "peculiar to the Jews," so that the figure of the Jew came to represent "'unnatural' sex" (34–38, 44). In this way, Carpenter argues, "the pathologization of sexuality was intimately linked with the production of a sense of national and imperial identity" (37). [End Page 204] The second half of the book re-reads well-known Victorian women's writings in the context created by the circulation of these "Family Bibles with Notes and Commentary." So, for example, Carpenter devotes one chapter to a discussion of the biblical discourse on menstruation as it appears in Charlotte Brontë's Villette and another to an exploration of the theme of (female) circumcision in...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish studies in Canada→Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→