« Marot y fut » : <i>Le Discours de la court</i> de Claude Chappuys
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1543 Claude Chappuys published Le Discours de la court, a long poem in praise of the court of Francis I. This text, a hybrid of moral allegory and enumerative discourse, recalls themes, structures, and poetic language that can be found in Guillaume de Lorris, Jean Lemaire de Belges, and above all, as I will argue, Marot, with whom Chappuys had collaborated earlier, for example in the context of the Blasons anatomiques du corps féminin. Yet at the same time, and more importantly, this article demonstrates that Chappuys’s poem, despite its non-controversial tone, can be read as an implicit rejection of key aspects of Marot’s heritage. Indeed, Chappuys condemns Marot’s polemical vein indirectly through the negative depiction of the Pasquin-L’Arétin duo, a clear figure of the satirical genre, and through veiled allusions to L’Enfer and the coq-à-l’âne poems. This presence of Marot in the intertext of an extremely consensual work written for Francis I is all the more significant when one remarks that the Discours was published just a few months after Marot’s flight to Geneva, in a renewed context of interconfessional tension; it constitutes, so to say, the poem’s flipside. Symptomatically, the only direct mention of Marot in the Discours is laconic, "Marot was here," and can be read in different ways. This article can be seen as a discussion of this short phrase and its resonances, with special attention given to its specific location in the carefully elaborated catalogue of the court that makes up the second half of the work. Generally speaking, the following offers an introduction to Chappuys’ poem and attempts to rehabilitate a work that has been neglected or read primarily in a political perspective.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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.
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".