MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503521027

Richard J. Moll, Ed.: William Caxton: The Book of Ovyde Named Methamorphose

2015· article· en· W2503521027 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Takako Kato

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Early Book Society for the Study of Manuscripts and Printing History · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingClassicsSuccessor cardinalPeriod (music)HistoryArtLiteratureArt historyMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RICHARD J. MOLL, ED. William Caxton: The Book of Ovyde Named Methamorphose. Studies and Texts 182. British Writers of Middle Ages and Early Modern Period 4. Toronto, Canada: PIMS and Bodleian Library, 2013. 652 pp. It was William Caxton who first produced an English translation of Ovid's Metamorphoses, no doubt one of most influential classical texts in English literary world. Caxton--a merchant, diplomat, and publisher-printer--was also a prolific translator. He translated and published twenty-one works in English, mainly from French but also from Latin and Dutch. According to Wynkyn de Worde, Caxton's successor, Caxton was a diligent translator who fynysshed translating Lives of Fathers from French into English at laste daye ofhys lyff, a project de Worde completed by publishing and printing his master's translation (7). Caxton's translation of The Booke of Ovyde Named Methamorphose, however, does not exist as a printed edition. Only part of it, Books 10 to 15, was known to have survived for almost five hundred years, until 1966, when a manuscript containing Books 1 to 9 of his translation was rediscovered. The English literary world then had to wait almost another half a century before Richard J. Moll's eagerly awaited edition appeared in 2013. Moll's introduction opens an account of reunion of two volumes of single manuscript. Caxton's translation of Books 10 to 15, Cambridge, Magdalene College, Pepys Library 2124, has been known to be in Pepys library since 1688, while copy that contains Books 1 to 9 had been long lost as the very rubbish of Thomas Phillipps collection (2). The rediscovered Phillipps manuscript was put up for an auction in London in 1966 and initially sold to an American collector. Public appeals in United Kingdom managed to raise 22 percent of necessary matching funds needed to keep it in Britain, and Phillipps manuscript was about to be separated from other half of manuscript by Atlantic Ocean. Then George Braziller came up an idea to publish and sell facsimiles of manuscript as a way to raise funds. The first half of manuscript is now Cambridge, Magdalene College, Old Library F.4.32, and it sits together in a display case Pepys manuscript (2). Moll's edition is first critical edition of Caxton's entire translation. The text of single extant manuscript is presented a minimum of editorial interventions (48). Hence cases of Caxton's mistranslation, such as Daedalion to be transformed into an ostrich rather than a goshawk, are allowed to stand as they are (note to 11.732). The text, which was produced with a wide range of readers in mind ( 2), has modern capitalization and punctuation and hence is easy to read, particularly aid of an extensive glossary (577-609), a useful index of proper names, which gives both Middle English and modern forms (610-652), and an introduction to grammatical features of Caxton's language (36-41). The extensive introduction also invites further scholarly investigation into hitherto understudied areas. For example, Moll untangles some of complicated textual tradition of Ovid's works before Caxton. Caxton used French Ovide moralise in prose as text of his translation. This prose Ovide moralise was itself an adaptation of French verse Ovide moralise. The verse version contained multiple layers of interpretation and explanation of Ovid's original poem, but anonymous author of prose version reproduced only historical and moral interpretations of its verse source and removed Christian allegorizations (21). Three manuscripts of French prose version survive, although none of them was used by Caxton as abase text for his translation (22). The analysis of textual errors suggests that Caxton's text and London manuscript both derived from a now-lost common (a), while manuscripts now in Paris and Saint Petersburg derived from a different copy (b). …

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.663

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Early Book Society for the Study of Manuscripts and Printing HistorySame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207