MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610124638 · doi:10.1353/mln.2017.0034

Ficino in Spain by Susan Byrne

2017· article· en· W2610124638 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMLN · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEarly Modern Spanish Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMAGIC (telescope)AstrologyBaroqueMysticismContext (archaeology)HistoriographyPoetryLiteratureClassicsIntellectual historyHistoryArtMotleyArt historyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Ficino in Spain by Susan Byrne Gabrielle Piedad Ponce-Hegenauer Susan Byrne, Ficino in Spain. U of Toronto P, 2015. 364 pp. With Ficino in Spain Susan Byrne has made a long overdue intervention in the "purist, all Spanish approach" to intellectual—and therefore, literary— history of Spain. Her revision covers four major centuries, 1500-1900, and a broad range of disciplines: theology, astrology, political philosophy, mysticism, medicine, magic and poetry (both verse and prose). In this groundbreaking study, Byrne combines meticulous research into the textual and circulation history of Ficino's texts with equally attentive close-readings and analysis of the ways in which his writing and thought were transposed, reiterated and reimagined by Spanish authors. Byrne illuminates the Ficinian presence in authors such as Miguel de Cervantes, Francisco Aldana, John of the Cross, Luis de León and Juan de Pineda in such a way that she both augments the scholarly understandings of the Italian philosopher, and creates new hermeneutical insights into Spanish Golden Age authors. Due to the dearth of true comparatist studies of this kind focused on the Spanish context, Byrne's study will be difficult to situate within intellectual and literary discourse on early modern Spanish Letters. Her study is and should be viewed as an exemplary and pioneering work which resituates the motley culture of Renaissance and Baroque Spain within a comparative European context. She opens a door which consistently has been closed by hegemonic readings of this period through the historiography of a strictly Counter-Reformation—often deceptively modern—and Nationalistic perspective. Bryne's study is divided into six chapters which document and examine Ficinian texts from ownership and readership through authorship and influence. Chapter 1 undertakes the nearly quixotic challenge of cataloguing and studying the holdings in Spanish libraries of texts by Ficino or related to Ficinian readership. In chapter 2 Byrne examines the ways in which several of the Ficinian texts chronicled in chapter 1 appeared either in direct citation or in reformulations by Spanish authors. Chapters 3 and 4 expand the Ficinian corpus to Hermes Tirsmegistus and other Neoplatonic texts which were inextricably woven into the fabric of Ficinian thought. Chapter 5 more closely examines Ficino as a figure in the Spanish imagination, frequently allied with the creative faculties of the poet in important thinkers such as Juan Huarte de San Huan and Lopez Pinciano, both of whom have been noted for their remarkable influence on Cervantes. Chapter 6 augments the core [End Page 523] of this study by exploring the place of Ficino's Neoplatonism in the development of political philosophy in Spain. In doing so, Byrne implicitly recovers a historiography which nuances and complicates the standard approaches to the Spanish empire and its articulation as a historical phenomenon. Of remarkable breadth and depth, Byrne frequently surmounts the unappreciated challenge of writing on an author whose range of influence demands an interdisciplinarity which few contemporary scholars have demonstrated. Byrne should be commended particularly for the recovery of circulation, readership, expurgation and commentary. In doing so Byrne informs us not only of the varied manner of Ficinian readership, but also peers, as though from behind a curtain, into the increasingly evident divide between religious orthodoxy and imaginative or intellectual practice. She shows not only that Ficino was a foundational thinker in early modern Spain, but also how and in what ways. For example, the library of Columbus's son, Hernando Colón, held a non-expurgated 1567 edition of Plato's Opera omnia which ironically had belonged to Don Eugenio Nicolás de Guzmán, self-identified as Censor for the Inquisition. Guzmán's annotations partake in the debate over the validity of Solon's story in Plato's Timaeus—one of Plato's most circulated texts throughout the medieval period. I underscore Byrne's inclusion of such details both because they reveal distance between Counter-Reformation discourse and readerly discourse, and because throughout her study Byrne is acutely sensitive to the ways in which various Platonic, Neo-Platonic and Hermetic texts were not only synthesized by Ficino, but also accompanied readership of his texts and translations of his texts in Spain. Ficinian readership did not simply...

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.210 · 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