Reading Jerome in the Renaissance: Erasmus' Reception of the "Adversus Jovinianum"
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scholars are now devoting more attention to the reception of the Church Fathers during the Renaissance and Reformation. While Saint Jerome's function as icon and exemplar has been the subject of substantial study, his role as an author, read and edited during the Renaissance, still awaits thorough investigation. This essay examines how Erasmus of Rotterdam, the greatest Renaissance editor of Jerome, read the Church Fathers most elaborate polemic in favor of virginity's moral and spiritual superiority to marriage, the Adversus Jovinianum. An investigation of Erasmus’ editorial apparatus for this text, especially his scholia, reveals a complex reading. Erasmus applauded Jerome's rhetorical skill but ventured cautious criticism of his scriptural exegesis without taking a firm position in the controversy over the relative merits of virginity and marriage.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it