MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1673031060 · doi:10.3138/flor.29.001

Royal Mercy in Later Medieval Scotland

2012· article· en· W1673031060 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Cynthia J. Neville

Bibliographic record

VenueFlorilegium · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Literature and History
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVictoryThroneScotsRoyalistClassicsBattleProcessionArtSWORDAncient historyHistoryLawPoliticsPhilosophyLiteraturePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Towards the end of October 1308, following a campaign that saw Robert Bruce secure his hold over the region of Moray, William earl of Ross found it wise to abandon the support he had to date given to Edward I of England in favour of the new king of Scots. The earl’s treason against the latter was notorious and of long standing: he had refused to recognize Bruce’s seizure of the throne in the summer of 1306, had carried fire and sword to the king’s supporters and the women of his kindred, and had been in correspondence with the enemy English as recently as the previous spring. The singular harshness and “terrible completeness” that marked Bruce’s “herschip” of the province of Buchan after the victory of royalist forces near Inverurie stands in marked contrast to the magnanimity that the king demonstrated towards Earl William himself in a public assembly held at Auldearn Castle. Here, before a large crowd of secular and ecclesiastical magnates the earl of Ross publicly confessed his offences; with joined hands and on bended knee he performed homage to Bruce and swore a solemn oath henceforth “faithfully to give [him] service, aid and counsel.” Bruce’s return gesture was an open offer of his “innate goodness, inspired mercy and special grace” and the remission of “all rancour of spirit” towards the traitor.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.769
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

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)0.0080.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.192 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFlorilegiumSame topicMedieval Literature and HistoryFrench-language works237,207