MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4303491857 · doi:10.1017/9781800106093.009

What has Darwin to do with Óðinn? Shapeshifting, God, and Nature in the ‘Great Story of the North’

2022· other· en· W4303491857 on OpenAlexaff
Dustin Geeraert

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDarwin (ADL)PhilosophyHistoryGenealogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Had he lived in the eighth century rather than the twentieth, J.R.R. Tolkien would have made an excellent apologist for the monks at Lindisfarne. Apparently too fond of the ancient Germanic songs, the monks received an impassioned letter from Alcuin, their Anglo-Saxon brother then working in the court of Charlemagne: ‘Quid Hinieldus cum Christo?’ Alcuin demanded. ‘What has Ingeld to do with Christ?’ This is the Great Story of the North, which should be to all our race what the Tale of Troy was to the Greeks. William Morris and Eiríkur Magnússon, The Story of the Volsungs (1870) Anthony Ugolnik begins ‘Wordhoard Onleac: The medieval sources of J.R.R. Tolkien's Linguistic Aesthetic’ (1977) by noting that Tolkien nevertheless had plenty of ‘contemporary Alcuins’ to respond to. These were guardians of respectable orthodoxy who denied the importance of medieval literature, much less medievalism, in the modern age. In John D. Rosenberg's terms, while composing the Idylls of the King (1859–85) even Lord Tennyson was ‘urged not to write about knights in armor but to compose an epic on Work or Sanitation’. Yet literary works which respond to medieval ones always track their own time through anachronisms; and in the Idylls Tennyson demonstrates as much awareness of contemporary intellectual developments as elsewhere. Even Tennyson's self-doubt as to the relevance of ancient forms is presented in a manner indicating awareness of contemporary palaeontology: ‘For nature brings not back the mastodon’. Indeed, like philology, palaeontology pre-serves and examines what is ancient far beyond the local concerns of any upstart orthodoxy. Gradually synthesizing enormous amounts of evidence, Charles Darwin knew that his society would find the discovery of evolution by natural selection to be shocking and threatening. Paradigm shifts in science, particularly those with implications for human nature, create ‘shockwaves’ to which writers adapt – particularly those who, like medievalists, implicitly compare past and present. As Peter Morton observes, few scientific discoveries have been more intellectually revolutionary than natural selection. Gillian Beer notes that despite his reluctance, Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859) created a philosophical upheaval: ‘Everyone found themselves living in a Darwinian world in which old assumptions had ceased to be assumptions, could be at best beliefs, or myths, or, at worst, detritus of the past’.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.023
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207