Les apports de la longue durée pour l’étude du renouvellement des oligarchies municipales : la Loi de Bruxelles, du temps de Philippe le Bon à 1795
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Philippe Guignet, The Long-Term Contribution to the Study of the Renewal of Municipal Oligarchies. The Brussels Town Council from the Time of Philip the Good up to 1795. In this paper, Ph. Guignet develops a serial approach to the social history of institutions. He scans the recruitment of the first member of the town council in Brussels. His survey deals with the period between the 1421 status that created a power divided into lineages and crafts and the fall of the town council old model in 1795. Ph. Guignet focuses on each century, then on each quarter of a century to highlight the oligarchic fluctuations giving rhythm to the different steps of this recruitment. He also implements a battery of statistical indicators such as indicators of central tendencies, dispersion parameters, concentration ratios. The decline of recruitment on a narrower base of families is undoubtedly significant in the xviith century and even more in the last century of the Old Regime. The author witnesses in Brussels an evolution he had already detected in the past, namely in other towns such as Mons and Tournai. However, considering the rate of power concentrated in the hands of a few families reveals a reality that is only apparently paradoxical. In Brussels, there have never been as many different families inside the municipal government as in the xvth century. However, when considering the recruitment of representatives of lineages at the time of Philip the Good, Charles the Bold and Mary of Burgundy, we find a concentration of power held by the upper strata of the oligarchy. This concentration is as strong as in the three centuries of modern times and it may be even stronger. The political staff derived from the crafts is more numerous than the one coming from the lineages. However, the most notable oligarchic thrust must be seen among the dignitaries of corporations, especially in the xviiith century.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".