Bibliographic record
Abstract
All the early civilizations compared in this study had kings. In modern political terminology this signifies that sovereignty, or supreme authority, was symbolically embodied in an individual person rather than in some collectivity of people such as all adults, all males, all property owners, or all nobles or some abstract concept such as God or Jean-Jacques Rousseau's General Will (Kamenka 1989: 7). The terms used to designate kings had different meanings and connotations in the different civilizations. The Aztec word that is glossed as ‘king’ was tlatoani (plural tlatoque ), which in Nahuatl meant ‘great/revered speaker’. The Aztec and their Nahuatl-speaking neighbours applied this term to all hereditary heads of states, but they conceptualized political leadership in a dyadic fashion. The tlatoani shared sovereignty with the cihuacoatl , a hereditary official appointed from a junior branch of the royal family who could not become king. The cihuacoatl oversaw the courts and palace administration and when necessary acted as regent. Although his title meant ‘snake woman’, like the tlatoani the holder of this office was always a male. In Aztec thought, the tlatoani and cihuacoatl together symbolized lordship, just as the supreme deity Ometeotl, Lord and Lady of Twoness, was a dual entity that constituted the totality of existence. In practice, however, the Aztec tlatoani was a supreme ruler.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.106 | 0.027 |
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".