Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines how Italian dramatists of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries represented the Holy Land in the plays that they composed for performance by young men in religious confraternities. The fact that these plays were meant to have a strong pedagogical purpose makes their representation of the Holy Land all the more important not only for the historical aspect of how ancient Palestine was understood and represented in early modern Italy, but also for what this representation meant for Christians and Jews living in early modern Italy. The questions of historical understanding and knowledge are thus closely tied to the questions of the revival of interest in Hebraic knowledge in Renaissance Italy and of the growing anti-Semitism of the time (when ghettos were established in cities such as Venice and Florence, to mention just two). At the same time, when a city such as Florence begins to envision itself and present itself as “the new Jerusalem,” the depiction of Jerusalem (in particular) and the Holy Land (in general) in the religious plays mounted by its young men becomes all the more revealing. The Holy Land can thus be both the exotic Orient and quotidian Florence, part of the East and of the West, both Hebrew and Christian. By extension, the “Jew” can be the “Other” but also the “Self.”
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".