MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413751787 · doi:10.3138/ecf.2023-0058

“The kindness that two Queens can beg”: Staging Consensus in John Banks’s <i>The Island Queens</i> (1684)

2025· article· en· W4413751787 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brandon Chua

Bibliographic record

VenueEighteenth-Century Fiction · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicScottish History and National Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKindnessGenealogyPsychologyHistoryPsychoanalysisPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

John Banks’s historical tragedies featuring Tudor queens produced for the Restoration theatres in the 1680s have often been credited with initiating the theatrical trend for female-centred sentimental spectacle across the long eighteenth century. This article explores the political determinants of Banks’s feminocentric pathetic drama. Focusing on Banks’s last Tudor history play, The Island Queens (1684) and its portrayal of monarchical authority as forms of female distress, the author locates she-tragedy’s origins within an emerging public demanding greater access to state power. By casting national history in scenes of female suffering, she-tragedy works to facilitate and domesticate political disputation, enabling opposition while embodying the volatile mix of religious and political convictions in vulnerable women. The feminization of history enacted by Banks’s influential tragic practice reimagines a theatrical commons within an audience divided by political factions while redefining participation within a newly inclusive public sphere.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.193

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0250.038
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEighteenth-Century FictionSame topicScottish History and National IdentityFrench-language works237,207