<i>Rethinking Canada: The Promise of Women's History</i> ‐ Edited by Veronica Strong‐Boag, Mona Gleason and Adele Perry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Christine Peters's book Patterns of Piety, which studies the role of women in English religion both before and after the Reformation, is a welcome addition to the scholarship on gender and premodern European religion.Patterns of Piety is worth the price of admission simply in being the first fully-rounded consideration of the role of women in the late medieval English church, but it is also much more than that, as it offers a learned and finely shaded picture of the Reformation and its effects on English women.Anyone who has worked on any part of the fields Peters's book covers will recognise the enormous breadth of research that underlies it.The arguments Peters derives from that research are, for the most part, subtle and persuasive, eschewing the easy dichotomies and blinkered prejudices that plague the field of English Reformation history.Throughout Patterns of Piety Peters is determined to tread a fine line of nuanced argument: the question 'what was the impact of the Reformation on women' (p. 1) does not have, Peters rightly insists, a simple answer.She treats the process of religious change in the late medieval and early modern period with admirable complexity.Peters avoids in her account of the late medieval church, for instance, a picture of unchanging 'traditional' religion, instead describing a religious culture that was both multivalent and always in process.One of Peters's most interesting arguments is that late
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".