A warning to England: Monstrous births, teratology and feminine power in Elizabethan broadside ballads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines Elizabethan broadside ballads depicting ‘monstrous’ birth defects as expressions of societal unease concerning the rule of women in late sixteenth-century England. It deals particularly with a surge in these publications during the early reign of Elizabeth I. These one-page reports interpreted the birth defects as reflecting God’s disapproval of both individual and collective sins, and the authors urged the populace to repent. The essay explores the concept of the ‘prodigious’ monster in Renaissance thought, especially as a reflection of the feminine imagination, and its use in religious propaganda as a visible expression of divine wrath. Noting several parallels between the twentieth-century depictions of monstrous femininity and the treatment of birth in 1970s ‘body horror’ films such as The Brood (Cronenberg, Montréal 1979), the essay argues that the focus on birth in these ballads is reflective of tensions between the strict gender roles in wider society and questions of Elizabeth’s succession in sixteenth-century England.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".