Sir Simonds D’Ewes and “the Poitovin Cholick”: Persecution, Toleration, and the Mind of a Puritan Member of the Long Parliament
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1637, Sir Simonds D’Ewes, MP, wrote a short treatise entitled The Primitive Practise For Preserving Truth. In it he argued that religious persecution was antichristian and that “tender consciences” should be protected and accommodated rather than forced. Knowing that the licensing authorities would reject it, D’Ewes did not publish his work until 1645. He chose to print it at precisely the moment when the Scots and their allies in the Westminster Assembly and the Long Parliament were pushing hard to instill a Presbyterian church government in England. Although D’Ewes has been called a Presbyterian, his position in this treatise is more in line with the Independents. Speaking in the House of Commons on April 24, 1645, he heatedly opposed a proposal to settle control of admission to the Eucharist in local presbyteries. Besides its importance for the debate on toleration, the historical and theological argument in The Primitive Practise is also valuable for the insights it provides into D’Ewes’s political outlook and his behavior as a Parliamentarian.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".