Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is now nearly forty years since the landmark publication in 1977 of the first volume of the Folger Library Edition of the Works of Richard Hooker under the capable direction of William Speed Hill, its general editor. 1 Since then (and to a considerable extent spurred on by the appearance of this splendid, modern critical edition) there has been a remarkable resurgence of scholarly interest in the ideas of this eminent Elizabethan scholar, philosopher, and theologian.A great many books and articles as well as several collections of essays devoted to the study and interpretation of Richard Hooker (1554-1600) have appeared during the intervening period, and the magnitude of interest has grown at a steadily increasing pace.The Folger edition of the complete Works (including newly discovered manuscripts and Hooker's Autograph Notes from the Library of Trinity College, Dublin, together with extensive textual 'Introductions and Commentary' in two large companion volumes, plus a comprehensive 'Index of Names and Works' cited throughout the edition) took twenty-one years to complete.The final volume of the edition, the Index, was published in 1998.An influential collection of critical studies of Hooker's thought was published in 1997 under the capable editorship of A.S. (Steve) McGrade, the product of an international conference held at the Folger Shakespeare Library and Washington National Cathedral in 1993 to mark the quatercentenary of John Windet's first edition of Books I-IV of Hooker's magnum opus: Of the Lawes of Ecclesiasticall Politie. 2 Several collections of essays on Hooker appeared in the decade following: one in the Sewanee Review edited by John Booty (1993), 3 another in an issue of the Journal of Religious History edited by Bruce Kaye, 4 and a third in a series of issues in Churchman edited by Gerald Bray marked the quatercentenary of 1 W. Speed Hill, gen.ed.
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 | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.078 | 0.060 |
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".