Stephen Mark Holmes. Sacred Signs in Reformation Scotland: Interpreting Worship, 1488–1590.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work in Scottish history has done much to reveal the nature and scope of religious change in the sixteenth century. Protestant historiography from 1560 onward has described this period as a time when the new Protestant Reformed Church triumphed over a corrupt and ineffectual Catholic Church. This traditional narrative has been subjected to searching critiques in the last few decades. With Sacred Signs in Reformation Scotland: Interpreting Worship, 1488–1590, Stephen Mark Holmes hammers another nail into the coffin by using a strikingly original and multidisciplinary approach to examine contemporary understandings of the signs and symbols of the Christian liturgy. This book will appeal to those interested in the history of religion, the book, education, and material culture. The focus of Sacred Signs in Reformation Scotland is on “liturgical interpretation,” a term that Holmes defines as “the application of the methods of patristic and medieval biblical exegesis to public worship” (11). The book studies the way in which medieval and early modern Scottish ecclesiastics examined how the liturgy, with its appeal to the senses through its words, objects, and actions, conveyed an inner spiritual meaning. Most influential of all for later writers was William Durandus’s Rationale divinorum officiorum (1286), which is discussed in detail in chapter 1 in order to introduce readers to the “Durandus method” of liturgical commentary.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".