Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1439 the first books from the bequest of Humfrey, duke of Gloucester, arrived at Oxford, seeding the outlook of Italian humanism in the scholastic bower of the English medieval university. It is a date that will serve as well as any to announce the arrival in England of the new priorities associated with the subtle cultural stimulus that we now call ‘northern humanism’. In the subsequent unfolding of that influence its most celebrated exponent and disciple, in his own day and after, was Thomas More. Indeed, although his celebrity extends far beyond that of the humanist enterprise of the early Tudors, his achievement in that literary milieu of itself would have ensured his lasting reputation. His early intellectual formation also defines the period and manner in which northern humanism took root in England. By the time More arrived at Oxford around 1492, being some fourteen years of age, his privileged education had begun to prepare him to participate fully in the cultural sea-change foreshadowed by the reception of this new outlook on learning and civil life. We must therefore begin with a brief discussion of what is implied in the term ‘humanism’ as well as what is not. The humanism of the European Renaissance was subtle precisely because it was not an ideology or philosophy. Its adherents could indeed be passionate in pursuit of aims that could be widely varied, but in their origins, the central texts of their enterprise were the same as those of the medieval university: the magisterial legacy of Greece and Rome, of antique grammar and rhetoric, of Aristotle and, especially in the north, of the foundational texts of Christian antiquity, notably those of scripture and the Church Fathers. This was the bedrock of European culture, revisited from time to time in a ‘classical revival’ marked by a fresh resort to antiquity and a new period of intellectual achievement.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
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".