From a <i>View to a Discovery</i>: Edmund Spenser, Sir John Davies, and the Defects of Law in the Realm of Ireland
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
This article is a comparative analysis of Edmund Spenser’s A View of the Present State of Ireland and Sir John Davies A’Discovery of the True Causes Why Ireland Was Never Entirely Subdued ... until the Beginning of His Majestys Happy Reign. Over the past two decades, Nicholas Canny has argued for the centrality of Spenser’s View to the British colonial enterprise in Ireland during the seventeenth century, suggesting that Davies Discovery adhered closely to the ideas of Spenser on Irish affairs. These ideas were marked by an unabashed advocacy of military and judicial violence and a deep scepticism as to the effectiveness of the English common law, its procedures and values, in the settling of Irish affairs. This article challenges the interpretation of Canny arguing alternatively that these two texts offer, not only rival views on the efficacy of the English law in Ireland as an agent of cultural change, but also competing narrative models for writing the history of early modern Ireland, one ethnological deriving from Spenser’s View and one sovereignty-centered deriving from Davies Discovery.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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