Bibliographic record
Abstract
When is the end to an environmental history of medieval Europe? If the protracted transformation of late antiquity marked the advent of a new cultural entity with its own characteristic, if not all distinctive, ways of interacting with natural forces in a certain part of the earth’s surface, what makes a comparable conclusion to this story? When it comes to periodization, multiple historical discourses, climatological, economic, sociological, epidemiological, cultural, and more, commonly talk past one another at best, each displaying its typical reductionism and determinism. Multiple perspectives on natural and cultural evolutions show autonomous and interactive changes playing out from the fourteenth century into the sixteenth. Ecological crisis? Anthropogenic overshoot, slow chill, sudden natural shock As just seen, climate in the form of the Little Ice Age and disease as manifest in the Black Death do provide bold historical markers with immediate effects in the curtailing of primary production and seasonal human activities and the magnitude of human deaths. Do these identify the end of the Middle Ages in environmental terms? Simple quantitative relationships of Europeans to their surroundings were surely recalibrated. Having reached some 75–80 million around 1300, their numbers fell by 30–60 per cent in the twenty years between the mid-1340s, which Christian Pfister has called the worst climatic conditions of the past millennium in central Europe, and the mid-1360s, with what the same expert has described as the coldest winter of the second millennium. At macrocosmic and microcosmic scales these rapidly catastrophic mid-fourteenth-century events invite juxtaposition with the climatic downturn associated with the ‘dry fog’ of 536 and the Justinianic plague of 540, both with centuries of alleged after-effects. Natural cataclysms appeal to audiences and writers who enjoy a past simply forged by natural forces.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".