War and Government in the French Provinces. Picardy 1470-1560
Bibliographic record
Abstract
70 / Renaissance and Reformation / Renaissance et Réforme becomes rather obtrusive.Certainly more recent scholarship on the experience and social make-up of seventeenth-century Mennonites is much less negative.This point leads us to the one major drawback of van Deursen's important study, one that is likely not his fault.Why did it take ten years to see the work appear in English translation?Van Deursen's excellent and balanced analysis of Dutch society deserves to have had an international audience much sooner.Research conducted by Dutch scholars on popular religion, culture and witchcraft, for example, has virtually exploded in the last decade.As a result, some of Plain Lives* conclusions seem outdated by the fascinating findings published since 1981.On the whole, however, van Deursen*s study deserves to be read by all those interested in understanding the world that was early modem Netherlands.Written in a highly readable and engaging fashion, marvellously blending anecdotal and scientific evidence, Plain Lives provides a solid evidentiary basis for arguing that the experience of early modem Dutch people diverged considerably from that of their contemporaries elsewhere.Students of European social history will find it a well-documented study proving that the experience of common people in that period was not uniformly bleak.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".