‘Argier’ through Renaissance Drama: Investigating History, Studying Etymology and Reshuffling Geography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scholarly occupations most often deal with The Tempest and Tamburlaine the Great, Part I & II, without much heed taken as to the real meaning of the recurrent syntagm ‘Argier’ and what its origins really are. This archaeological and toponymic effort runs counter to a dynastic tradition emanating from an approximate historical evaluation and geographic misevaluation which harbor the usual and inconsiderate thought that ‘Argier’ is “an old name for Algiers”, or even incongruously refer to it in some cases as “Algeria”. Under the whirlwind of the Derridean concept of “deconstruction”, and within a Saidian frame of reference, this paper subverts these centrifugal parameters configured by editors, usually through a refractory lens and a superficial historical trawl, and perpetuated by translators, appropriation and adaptation practitioners and other generations of editors. An eye to Renaissance plays and their editions all the more diverse have in fact given cause to suspect such deductions imprecise and only partially reliable. Coming with the augurs of its time, one should confront this seemingly unimportant terminology long-neglected through a painstakingly historical, geographical and linguistic prism to theorize its origins and linguistic usage in Europe, its development in the 16 th and 17 th centuries, and comprehend how it has come to resemble today's ‘Algiers’. Memory as safeguarded in literature, and Renaissance drama most significantly, serves hereby as a canvas to read ‘Argier’ and ‘toponymically’ study its different name bestowals as projected in 16 th and 17 th c. Europe (namely France and England) in an attempt to imagine and reconstruct its origins, and comprehend its usage and development with a focus on its mention in English Renaissance Drama, Shakespeare's The Tempest and Marlowe's Tamburlaine the Great (Part I & II), and Renaissance French drama, with particular attention to Philippe Quinault's unedited version of La généreuse ingratitude and its English translation by Sir William Lower Knight (The Noble Ingratitude).
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".