MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624198371 · doi:10.3917/rhmc.641.0097

Le cadavre du conspirateur : peur, colère et défense de la communauté à l’époque de la Saint-Barthélemy

2017· article· fr· W2624198371 on OpenAlexaff
Michel De Waele

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d’histoire moderne et contemporaine · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dagué, défenestré, brûlé, noyé, châtré, décapité, mutilé et pendu. Tel fut le sort réservé au cadavre de l’amiral de Coligny lors de la Saint-Barthélemy. Ce destin attendait également le corps de nombreux protestants à l’époque des troubles de religion. Les historiens ont interprété ces outrages comme une manifestation de la ferveur religieuse qui anime les catholiques du temps, désireux de purger leur communauté de la pollution générée par l’hérésie. Cet article se demande si les assauts contre les cadavres des huguenots ne relèvent pas également d’une autre dimension, qui trouve des échos dans une histoire large de l’outrage au cadavre. Les peurs vécues par les catholiques du temps n’étaient pas que religieuses. Elles étaient aussi sociales et politiques. Les attaques contre les cadavres traduisent ainsi un double état d’esprit : d’une part les peurs, tant spirituelle que temporelle, des catholiques, de voir les hérétiques s’emparer du royaume ou du moins, de leur communauté et, d’autre part, la colère, voire la haine, devant les moyens qu’ils auraient pris pour parvenir à leurs fins, c’est-à-dire la ruse et le complot.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.014
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d’histoire moderne et contemporaineSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207