Marlowe's Reading of Machiavelli and Anne Dowriche's The French Historie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of the Massacre at Paris is well-known. Typically, the conclusions drawn by the quick and often reactionary readings of the play have been unfairly scornful. The disparaging attitude towards Marlowe’s piece is bizarre when we consider that The Massacre was the highest grossing play of the season for Lord Strange’s Men, and today it seems to be disparaged more by critics than audiences or theatre professionals, as the few performances have shown. My purpose is not to rehash these important arguments but rather to show that Marlowe has in fact thoughtfully but radically presented an important historical document that deals with what then was the most shattering event to have shaken Europe. Marlowe saw that a radical event requires a radical presentation—his play should be understood as a simulacrum of the French massacre. This is an approach to the event that I will argue is based on several elements, including his reading of an important source for the play that has only recently been acknowledged, Anne Dowriche’s The French Historie.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".