Speaking with Authority: Reading Catherine of Siena in the Times of Vittoria Colonna
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article proposes a way of reading Vittoria Colonna’s lyric persona in the light of Catherine of Siena’s religious writings and philosophy of the self. In part 1, I begin by tracing the mystic profile that the participants of Colonna’s reformed circles ascribed to the saint. Those descriptions are then incorporated into a comparison of the schisms that shaped Christianity in Catherine’s times, namely the Avignon Papacy, and those of the Lutheran Reformation. In part 2, Colonna’s sacred charisma(s) is related to Catherine’s penitential and political model, thus identifying her Vita and epistles as a very possible literary source that Colonna could have used in her religious output and self-identification. In part 3, I analyze Colonna’s exegesis of the penitent Magdalene in the light of Catherine’s political reading of the same character. To conclude, I discuss the ways in which we can integrate the Trecento tradition into Colonna’s conception of grace and prophetic message of renovatio.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Literary and religious analysis of Vittoria Colonna and Catherine of Siena.
This is a literary and religious analysis of Catherine of Siena and Vittoria Colonna, not research practice.
Literary-historical reading of Vittoria Colonna and Catherine of Siena; humanities domain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".