Hunter Powell.<i>The Crisis of British Protestantism: Church Power in the Puritan Revolution, 1638–44</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hunter Powell completed his Ph.D. in 2011 under the supervision of John Morrill at Cambridge University. As he notes in his acknowledgments, he was Morrill’s 117th graduate student (!). This book is the product of his time as a research student at Cambridge, doubtless benefiting greatly from the genial but rigorous supervision of his mentor who has had a profound influence on the way historians have thought about the Puritan Revolution for the past forty years and especially about the importance of using contemporaries’ language and constructs to understand their issues. The focus of the book is on the Dissenting Brethren, the group of five congregational ministers who spent several years in exile in Holland in the 1630s but returned to England in 1640 after which, as members of the Westminster Assembly of Divines and as authors of the Apologeticall Narration, they played a critically important role in events through the 1650s. In Powell’s view “no group in the history of the Puritan Revolution had a more disproportionate impact on the course of events than this vocal minority” (3).
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".