Villani, Stefano. Making Italy Anglican: Why the Book of Common Prayer Was Translated into Italian
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book is singular in its approach for it at once is the story of a resounding failure and the chronicle of an impressive accomplishment.Italy, of course, did not become Anglican, yet the Book of Common Prayer was indeed translated into the Italian language.The study, penned by a scholar equally at home in the English and Italian early modern period, deals with both questions and answers that provide readers with a gripping read.In a sense only an early modern historian like Stefano Villani-steeped in Italian and English scholarship, trained in his trade in Italy, and engaged in a professional life in both his native Italy and the United States-is so correctly placed to be able to deal with English Protestants in Italy and Italian Protestants in England.Already an impressive body of previous work evinces his clear mastery of both questions and contexts.Now this monograph confirms and consolidates many of the questions and problems he has been working on for decades. Making Italy Anglican begins inVenice then shifts to London to later return to the Italian Peninsula.It straddles several centuries, beginning in the sixteenth century to conclude at the end of the nineteenth.Villani takes his readers on a breathtaking voyage, displaying the sheer complexity of questions about the religious profession, community, belonging, and translation to furnish us with the tools for explaining why the prayer book was such a paramount failure throughout the Italian Peninsula.It is as much the story of a book as it is about the people involved in its dissemination and use in the Italian language and the complicated and intricate history of Italy from the early modern to the modern period.In his introduction, the author states that it is "a story of failure-or rather, a series of interconnected failures that stretched over a period of almost three hundred years" (1).More than the failure of the dissemination of a prayer book, it was the failure of a model for religious practice that could rival or dispute Roman Catholic hegemony on the Italian Peninsula over three centuries, despite the efforts of interested parties in Italy and England.The book presents some of the seminal figures in this fascinating failure, some of them well known and others less so, such as Paolo Sarpi, Henry Wotton, William
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".