Le mythe de Venise au XVIIe siècle. Perspectives de recherche en littérature française
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La République de Venise s’est efforcée, du XVe siècle jusqu’à sa chute, de charger sa puissance politique et commerciale d’une double justification, politique et religieuse. En se servant des légendes orales qui circulaient depuis sa fondation, et en mettant en place une interprétation officielle de sa propre histoire, elle a fabriqué un mythe théologico-politique dont elle est le héros. Au tournant des XVIe et XVIIe siècles, alors que ce mythe atteint l’apogée de son influence chez le plus grand nombre des penseurs politiques européens, des contestations apparaissent, encouragées par les mutations de la méthode historique. Est-ce à dire que le mythe de Venise vit ses dernières heures ? Cet article se propose d’interroger la présence de traces du mythe politique vénitien chez les intellectuels français du XVIIe siècle. Ceux-ci, certes acquis à la lutte de Venise contre les abus politiques de la papauté depuis l’affaire de l’Interdit vénitien de 1606, prirent néanmoins part à un certain renouvellement méthodologique de l’écriture de l’histoire.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".