MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386903842 · doi:10.1353/chy.2021.0053

Undoing Babel: The Tower of Babel in Anglo-Saxon Literature by Tristan Major (review)

2021· article· en· W4386903842 on OpenAlex
Jodi Grimes

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueChristianity & Literature · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTower of BabelUndoingNarrativeContext (archaeology)HistoryLiteratureHebrewSociologyClassicsArtPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Undoing Babel: The Tower of Babel in Anglo-Saxon Literature by Tristan Major Jodi Grimes Undoing Babel: The Tower of Babel in Anglo-Saxon Literature. By Tristan Major. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2018. ISBN 978-1-4875-0054-2. Pp. ix + 289. $54.00. Only a few verses comprise the Tower of Babel narrative in the book of Genesis (Gen. 11:1–9), yet along with the Table of Nations (Gen. 10), the account raises significant questions concerning human nature, God's interactions with humanity, technological advance, and socio-linguistic diversity. The story itself tells of a monolingual people building a tower to reach the heavens only to be thwarted by God, who by "confusing" (Gen. 11:7) their language compels them to spread across the earth in new people groups. The text thus explains the presence of the many languages and nations that develop in the postdiluvian world. Undoing Babel reminds readers of an ancient Hebrew narrative that yet retains its relevance as global challenges increasingly require agreement across cultural-linguistic divides. Tristan Major, an assistant professor at Qatar University, analyzes interpretations of the story through the late Anglo-Saxon period. Examining the reception history of the Babel narrative as it peregrinates to Anglo-Saxon England, Major compares its treatments against the source texts and alongside contemporaneous treatments in historical context to explain how and to what effect the story is interpreted over time. In so doing, the book offers readers a delightful overview of the major authors, texts, and events that shape ideology and theological reform from ancient Judea and early Christian Rome to late Anglo-Saxon England. Major begins his book by citing the relevant passages from the English Revised Standard Version-Genesis 9:28–29, 10:1–32, and 11:1–9–and then opens his introduction with Archbishop Wulfstan's well-known diatribe against paganism. Moving chronologically in seven chapters starting with early Jewish and Christian writings, the book ends with a chapter on the Junius 11 manuscript and a conclusion. This study builds on the work of other scholars, notably Arno Borst (Der Turmbau von Babel: Geschichte der Meinungen über Ursprung and Vielfalt der Sprachen und Völker, 4 vols., 1957-1963), Daniel Anlezark (Water and Fire: The Myth of the Flood in Anglo-Saxon England, 2006), Bruce R. O'Brien (Reversing Babel: Translation among the English during an Age of Conquests, c. 800 to c. 1200, 2011), and Andrew Scheil (Babylon under Western Eyes: A Study of Allusion and Myth, 2016). Undoing Babel is unique in that it surveys the Genesis account's reception history through the Anglo-Saxon period. Chapter 1, "Early Jewish and Christian Antiquity," overviews the earliest presentations of the Table of Nations and Babel accounts. Compiled within the first five books of Hebrew Scriptures around 500 BCE (28), the [End Page 457] biblical text "does present a strong sense of land entitlement and illicit encroachment" by Ham's descendants (29), which may be why early Jewish authors focus on tripartite divisions in the nations descending from Noah's three sons. Major examines the Dead Sea Genesis Apocryphon, the book of Jubilees, and Josephus's Antiquitates Iudaicae to demonstrate how these writers emphasize ethnology and geography. Josephus's exegesis, Major observes, "emphasize[s] God's wish for the people to colonize the earth" (37). Moving to Christian writers, Major scrutinizes the work of Tertullian, Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, and finally, Augustine, who views "the biblical text as both a literal account that informs the ethnic and linguistic diversity in the world, and an allegorical account that informs the struggle of good and evil in the world" (49). The second chapter, "Latin Christian Antiquity," demonstrates how authors employ the biblical text to forge a Christian identity, to establish Christian connections genealogically to the Jewish people, and in some cases, "to demonize heretical groups or wrong-doers in general" (55). Augustine, stressing the importance of humilitas (69) in contrast to the pride demonstrated at Babel, connects Nimrod with "pride. . . wickedness . . . paganism and heresy" (56). This section also shows how early Christian theologians bookend "the diversity of Babel" with "Pentecostal unity" (66). Pope Gregory, consistent with his...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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