Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the last quarter of the fifteenth century onward, a large number of Middle Dutch texts containing the life of Christ were printed and dispersed in the Netherlands. In a recent study, an exploration of the previously not widely studied 'Lives of Jesus', Koen Goudriaan pointed out a remarkable discontinuity between the circulation of these texts in manuscript and print. Furthermore, the corpus of 'Lives' could be divided into two basic textual forms: an 'epical' type and a type in which the content of the text is arranged according to liturgical 'hours' or 'points'. Goudriaan suggested that the discontinuity between manuscript and print, and the division in epical and liturgical styles, is related to the intended and actual readership of these texts. This contribution contains a case-study on three different Middle Dutch 'Lives' that contain a more or less complete version of the life of Christ: the Tractaet vanden leven ons Heren Jesu Christi, Tboeck vanden leven Jhesu Christi and Dat leven ons liefs heren Jhesu Christi. Concentrating on the printing history, the previous history of the texts and the actual readership of these three 'Lives', we can conclude that the discontinuity and the division in two types of texts within the corpus of 'Lives of Jesus' are not so much related to the reading public (religious people or laity), but rather to the different and various functions each one of the texts fulfilled within late medieval religious life.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.187 | 0.077 |
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".