Bibliographic record
Abstract
WILLIAM ROWLEY’s tragedy All’s Lost by Lust (1619–20)1 is constructed from two plotlines. The main plot, a tale of rape and revenge during the Moorish invasion of Spain, is based on the Spanish legend of Florinda and Count Julian,2 but scholars have not yet identified precisely the source of the subplot and its tale of bigamy and murder. In 1985, Linda Woodbridge observed correctly that the subplot is based on the Italian tale of Didaco and Violenta, which originates with Matteo Bandello; however, she did not specify which of the many versions of this much-retold story Rowley used.3 In this article, I will begin by demonstrating that the subplot is based on William Painter’s retelling of the tale in his Palace of Pleasure (1566). Then, since there are considerable differences between Rowley’s play and Painter’s story, I will examine the possibility that two other English adaptations may have influenced Rowley: Thomas Achelley’s poem A Most Lamentable and Tragicall Historie (1576) and John Fletcher’s short play ‘The Triumph of Death’, one of the Four Plays, or Moral Representations, in One (c.1612–15); I will conclude, however, that no firm evidence exists to support this possibility. Finally, I will offer a brief history of the ways in which earlier attempts to identify the play’s source were led astray by confusions in the scholarly record; these confusions are worth noting if only to protect future scholars of the play from futile digressions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".