Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter surveys a range of sources from which the British derived their knowledge of Persia, and emphasises the persistent influence of some of these sources, most notably the Bible and the literature of ancient Greece. Moving forward from the Greek and Biblical representations of Persia, the study traces the persistence of this ancient understanding in the Early-Modern period, particularly as against the gradual emergence of first-hand contacts with the country, such as those of the Sherley brothers. An analysis of the British growing interest in Persian studies in the final quarter of the eighteenth century also forms part of the design of this chapter. The chief figure here is Sir William Jones, the founding father of the academic study of Oriental literatures. The chapter examines Jones’s ‘A Persian Song of Hafiz’ (1772) as one of the earliest examples of the scholarly treatment of Persian poetry in English, before moving on to explore the dynamic between the nineteenth-century politicised vision of Persia and the narrative of its decline and decay through studying James Morier’s popular fiction, <italic>The Adventures of Hajjî Baba of Ispahan</italic> (1824).
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".