Hospitalarios y obispos en Castilla durante los siglos XII y XIII = Hospitallers and Bishops in Castile During the Twelfth and Thirteenth Centuries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There were many periods in which good relations prevailed between the Order of Saint John and the bishops of Castile. However, it was inevitable that jurisdictional conflicts would eventually arise between the two powers. In Castile, they appear since the last quarter of the twelfth century. Unlike other military orders, the Castilian Hospitallers usually carried out this litigation with little violence and quickly sought an agreement with the concerned bishop. They often arrived at a standard solution to the disputes among the military orders and the bishops in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The ecclesiastical rights of Hospitaller churches were divided between the Order of Saint John and a specific bishop. The distribution varied in each diocese depending on the correlation of forces. This type of agreement can be identified in Castile as of the late twelfth century. In general terms, each bishopric came to a single agreement with the Order. Nevertheless, there were some like Zamora, Astorga or Toledo, with whom the Hospitallers made several agreements. This type of concord represents the most decisive accommodation mechanism of the Order of Saint John in the structures of the Castilian Church.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".