MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413277747 · doi:10.3138/flor-2023-0009

The Power of Patient Kingship: Supernatural Abduction in <i>Sir Orfeo</i> and the Third Branch of the <i>Mabinogi</i>

2025· article· en· W4413277747 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ruth Wehlau

Bibliographic record

VenueFlorilegium · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonarchyPower (physics)PhilosophyLiteratureArtPhysicsLawPolitical scienceThermodynamicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sir Orfeo’s tale of the abduction of a queen by a supernatural lord and her subsequent rescue by her husband is widely acknowledged to be analogous to similar narratives found in Celtic lore and literature. Most analogues proposed are Irish, yet another text mentioned less often in connection with Sir Orfeo is the classic work of medieval Welsh myth, The Four Branches of the Mabinogi. The Third Branch contains an interesting parallel to the Middle English poem. The Third Branch tells the story of Manawydan, a chieftain who is exiled from his land, and whose wife, Rhiannon, is abducted by an other-world lord. Manawydan waits seven years until he is able to bring about his wife’s release through a trick that allows him to bind the other-world chieftain with an oath, just as Orfeo is able to force the Fairy King to release Heurodis using the Fairy King’s oath. Furthermore, both texts highlight the heroes’ avoidance of violence. In the Third Branch, this includes explicit mention of sexual self-restraint; in Sir Orfeo, Orfeo’s patience is contrasted to the brutal force used by the other-world king in his abduction of Heurodis. In each text, the human hero’s patience and superior power with words, rather than the strength in his arms, is what frees the queen. Both texts use the trope of fairy abduction to imagine lordship in terms of self-control rather than royal authority and might, ultimately revealing that patience and humility are forms of power in themselves.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.176 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFlorilegiumSame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207