La collection du cardinal Antoine de Granvelle (1517-1586). L’inventaire du palais Granvelle de 1607
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assurer sa succession constitue un probleme delicat pour un cardinal. D’autant plus que dans le cas du cardinal de Granvelle, sa famille est de noblesse recente et que son ascension repose sur un capital difficile a transmettre, la faveur du prince. A la mort de son frere cadet, Thomas Perrenot de Chantonnay (1521-1571), que son pere avait choisi pour perpetuer la maison, le cardinal s’etait donc occupe de l’education de ses neveux, en particulier de l’aine, Francois. Mais il s’etait brouille avec lui en 1580 : « Mon nepveu Francois, apres s’estre icy fort mal conduyt, s’en est party mal accompagney, sans dire adieu ny me parler. Il dit a aulcuns qu’il va en Bourgongne. Je le tiens pour homme perdu et sans remide, et ne merite pas la bon receul, pour la honte qu’il faict a soy et a la maison. Il fauldra faire venir par deca son frere, que j’espere prandra meilleur chemin. La folie de ce jeusne sot me cause grand regret, [m]ais nul office que l’on aye faict en son endroit n’a peu profiter »1. Il choisit alors le frere cadet de Francois Perrenot, Jean Thomas, comme heritier universel. Et c’est donc a lui que furent transmis les biens du cardinal de Granvelle lorsque ce dernier mourut a Madrid en 1586. Mais Jean Thomas ne devait pas survivre longtemps a son oncle, car son navire sombra lors du desastre de l’Invincible Armada en 1588. Toutefois, cette eventualite avait ete prevue par le cardinal qui lui avait substitue sa propre sœur, Marguerite, veuve de Jean d’Achey. Celle-ci p [...]
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".