MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402951045 · doi:10.1177/00084298241270896

The Bard, the witch and the cathedral: A Shakespearean note on sacred kingship

2024· article· en· W4402951045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicolas Meylan

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Architectural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWitchMonarchyArtLiteratureAncient historyPhilosophyHistoryLawPolitical scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sacred kingship has been a fixture of anthropology and the history of religions since its introduction by James Frazer in the late 19th century. While sacred kingship has gone through numerous iterations, it has consistently served as a means to reflect on the more-than-human nature of kings, and hence of royal legitimation. It is to this latter issue that this article seeks to contribute by means of a case study drawn from the historical plays of William Shakespeare. Not only does the Bard provide a fine instantiation of sacred kingship; his plays also shed light on the ways the concept might be instrumentalized. Nicolas Meylan’s reading of Shakespeare thus suggests a theoretical adjustment to the general concept of sacred kingship by foregrounding its discursive dimension.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.256 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Religion/Sciences ReligieusesSame topicHistorical and Architectural StudiesFrench-language works237,207