MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2277322428 · doi:10.33137/rr.v31i4.9149

Les trois institutions oratoires à l'usage de Henri III: un <i>compendium</i> des traditions latine, hellénistique et humaniste

2008· article· en· W2277322428 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Claude La Charité

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCiceroRhetorical questionRhetoricCompendiumHumanismOrder (exchange)LiteratureArtPhilosophyHumanitiesClassicsMarginaliaArt historyTheologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literary tradition has preserved three Artes Rhetoricae written for the last of the Valois kings, who reigned in France under the name of Henry III from 1574 to 1589. These three texts are Jacques Davy Du Perron's Avant-discours de rhetorique, ou Traitté de l'eloquence, Jacques Amyot's Projet de l'eloquence royale, and Germain Forget's Rhetorique françoise faicte particulierement pour le roy Henry 3. All three very likely originated as academic speeches pronounced at the Louvre, in the presence of Henry III, in the final sessions of the Palace Academy during the summer of 1579. This article offers a re-reading of the three treatises in order to situate them in the history of rhetoric. It aims to show how each author collects and presents teachings of the principal rhetorical traditions. Thus, Du Perron, inspired mainly by Quintilian and Cicero, proposes a kind of abridged version of the rhetorical thought of Latin Antiquity. Amyot, for his part, puts forth a synthesis of ancient Greek rhetorical theory starting with Plutarch, Dyonisius of Halicarnassus and Demetrius of Phalerus. Germain Forget provides an account of Renaissance innovations, by adopting the nomenclature of Peter Ramus under the rubric of elocutio. The objective of this essay is to shed light on the complementary nature of the three treatises, as well as to suggest a probable order in which they were presented to the King, following a logical gradation from the most general to the most specific.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and Reformation→Same topicHistorical and Literary Studies→French-language works237,207→