Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between April and July 1413, a large group of Parisians led the violent Cabochien Uprising. This revolt has been positioned primarily as an extension of civil war politics between the Burgundians and the Armagnacs. I argue that it was far more than that; it was a meaningful example of political resistance and an extraordinary event that nonetheless borrowed from everyday practices of civil autonomy and agency. In drawing from but moving beyond the civil war narrative, I examine the importance of urban spatial tactics, voice and violence in this rebellion. This approach enables us to discern what opportunities were available to early fifteenth-century Parisians to directly challenge their exclusion from politics, and to carve out a place of importance for their voices. Moreover, the same source material for the rebellion also illuminates the established systems, the spaces and the habits that empowered Parisians in the day-to-day. It was these conditions that provided the scaffolding for their rebellion, and they reveal strong tension between the king’s sovereign authority and his subjects’ autonomy. These complicated dynamics limited the king’s actual power in the streets, and suggest that Parisians could lay claim to more independence than we have previous considered.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.012 |
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".