La triple furia de Cú Chulainn: motivos literarios y correlatos antropológicos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolSe replantea aqui la teoria de Dumezil sobre la aparicion de la furia guerrera en las leyendas del heroe irlandes Cu Chulainn y de uno de los trillizos romanos Horacios. Dicha teoria postula el caracter de rito iniciatico de los episodios correspondientes, por comparacion con el del danzante canibal en la tribu canadiense kwagu'l. Tras un detallado analisis, se concluye que Cu Chulainn presenta en realidad tres tipos de furia, una derivada del trance iniciatico y dos variedades de furia guerrera propiamente dicha. Solo la primera guarda relacion con el rito kwagu'l, mientras que la historia del joven Horacio resulta completamente ajena a este fenomeno y ha de explicarse como leyenda etiologica y juridica. EnglishHere is revisited Dumezil's theory about the battle fury linked to the legends of the Irish hero Cu Chulainn and one of the Horatii roman triplets. According to him, both legends show rites of passage, as it is proved by the comparison with the one performed in the sacred cannibal dance of the Canadian Kwakiutl Tribe. After a detailed review of the evidence, it is concluded that Cu Chulainn shows, in fact, three kinds of fury, one related to the initation trance, and two others as varieties of true battle fury. Only the first one can be twined with the Kwakiutl rite, while the young Horatius' story has no relation with this phenomenon and must be explained as a legal and etiologic legend.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".