MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W954060207 · doi:10.33137/rr.v30i2.11489

The Reception of Erasmus’ <i>Adages</i> in Sixteenth-Century England

2009· article· en· W954060207 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLexicography and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErasmus+ClassicsHistoryComposition (language)The RenaissanceAncient historyLiteratureArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Adages of Erasmus, a collection of more than 4,000 classical proverbs, was a bestseller in its time. The book was valued both for its usefulness in Latin composition and its witty asides on contemporary society. The dissemination of the Adages in England is of special significance because the genesis of the book and its dedication to the members of the Mountjoy family closely link it to that country. Its influence can be traced through the use of "Erasmian" adages in English literature as well as through translations and adaptations published in England during the sixteenth century. More immediate evidence of the wide dissemination of the work comes from the lists of English booksellers and book collectors. The present study is based primarily on the Oxford University Inventories and the wills in the Oxford Registrum Cancellarii. It furthermore examines reader reaction in the form of marginal remarks and inscriptions found in over 70 copies from the sixteenth century in the Bodleian Library.

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.

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 score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.298

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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