MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560813833 · doi:10.1353/cat.2016.0223

The Correspondence of Wolfgang Capito. Vol. 3: 1532–1536 by Erika Rummel

2016· article· en· W2560813833 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew Pettegree

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œCatholic historical review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsErasmus+ArchbishopClassicsGermanArtPhilosophyArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The Correspondence of Wolfgang Capito. Vol. 3: 1532–1536 by Erika Rummel Andrew Pettegree The Correspondence of Wolfgang Capito. Vol. 3: 1532–1536. Translated by Erika Rummel, annotated by Milton Kooistra. (Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 2015. Pp. xxx, 516. $175.00. ISBN 978-1-4426-3721-4.) Of all the first-generation reformers, Wolfgang Capito’s journey toward adherence to the evangelical cause was one of the most difficult and painful. As professor of theology at Basel, he was a friend of both Desiderius Erasmus and the printer Johann Froben. It was Capito who suggested to Froben the collected edition of Martin Luther’s early works that did so much to spread Luther’s teaching beyond Germany. In 1520 he became an adviser to Cardinal Albrecht von Brandenburg, archbishop of Mainz; even when, after much agonizing, he resigned his positions in the old church, these bonds remained strong. Here, in the third volume of this excellent edition of Capito’s correspondence, a storm erupts when Capito decided to publish a German translation of Erasmus’s De Concordia. This was already a risky venture, despite a preface that distanced the translator from the contents, and Capito only compounded the offense by adding a fulsome dedication to his old patron the archbishop. The judgment of fellow reformers was severe. An Augsburg friend reported that when the work was read aloud in the office of a local pharmacist (a charming and significant detail), “Some people were almost moved to fury because of the inconstancy shown by the preachers. Such things make many people exclaim, ‘By God and by the faith of men! The theologians barter with our souls, and play an atrocious tragedy!’” (Letter 522). [End Page 837] This incident illustrates the undoubted truth that academics do not always have the necessary skillset to negotiate a complex political environment—in Capito’s case, the intricacies of church building and interconfessional rivalries. By 1532, when this volume opens, Capito is a diminished figure, worn down by illness and playing second fiddle to Martin Bucer in Strasbourg. Many of the letters in this volume are institutional rather than personal, addressed collectively by the Strasbourg ministers or drafted by Bucer for their joint signature. This is the everyday life of a senior member of the ministerial team in one of Germany’s leading Protestant cities: offering advice to other churches, attempting to find suitable ministers for insufficiently staffed churches, and giving formal written guidance to the city council. Capito shows himself to be a good team player, but his personal feelings do not often shine through. He seldom unburdens himself to friends; indeed, much of the more personal correspondence in this volume consists of incoming letters from friends elsewhere. These letters demonstrate that Capito was a man who still commanded respect and affection but was not the figure of towering influence that might have been expected when he first adhered to the Reformation. The seasoned team of Erika Rummel and Milton Kooistra have done their usual excellent job of presenting smooth and lucid translations; the footnotes are concise and learned. Where letters are published elsewhere (in the correspondence of Heinrich Bullinger, John Calvin, Martin Bucer, Joachim Vadian, or Bonifacius Amerbach), they are summarized here. There is one further volume to be published to complete this excellent project. Andrew Pettegree University of St. Andrews Copyright © 2016 The Catholic University of America Press

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œCatholic historical reviewSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207