MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2807706314 · doi:10.33137/rr.v40i4.29271

Sometimes It’s the Place: The Anabaptist Kingdom Revisited

2018· article· en· W2807706314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Henry Suderman

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnabaptistsKingdomHumanitiesPolitical scienceHistoryArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interpretations of the Anabaptist Kingdom of Münster (23 February 1534 – 24 June 1535) and the actions of its primary protagonists have tended to be judgmental and dismissive, with little attention given to Münster Anabaptists’ self-descriptions. Studies tend to focus on the wildly imaginative components of the Anabaptist Kingdom as evidence and means for its dismissal. A spatial interpretation of the Anabaptist Kingdom, in which spatial categories are substituted for more conventional social and political categories, holds at least four benefits: it offers a more direct and focused access point into the study of Anabaptist action; it more accurately reflects the concerns of lay Anabaptists and civil authorities; it proposes unparalleled precision in analysis; and it is a particularly suitable analytic for explaining certain forms of cultural contestation and resistance. It is through the introduction of a spatial methodology, in which the Anabaptist Kingdom is interpreted as a deliberately designed and carefully staged social theatre, focused on the representation of power, that the hitherto inexplicable becomes understandable. Les études sur le royaume anabaptiste de Münster (23 février 1524–24 juin 1535) et sur les actions de ses principaux personnages semblent tendre aux jugements rapides et au mépris, sans accorder beaucoup d’attention aux descriptions que les anabaptistes de Münster donnent d’eux-mêmes. En effet, ces études ont tendance à se concentrer davantage sur le contenu de certaines fantaisies farfelues à l’égard du royaume anabaptiste afin de justifier leur mépris. Il y a plusieurs avantages à leur préférer une interprétation de l’espace du royaume anabaptiste qui remplace les catégories sociales et politiques plus conventionnelles par des categories spatiales. Cette démarche offre une porte d’entrée plus directe et mieux ciblée pour l’étude de l’action anabaptiste. Elle donne aussi un meilleur point de vue sur les préoccupations des anabaptistes laïcs et des autorités civiles. Enfin, elle permet une plus grande precision d’analyse et s’avère bien plus adaptée à expliquer certaines formes de contestations et de resistances culturelles. C’est décidément en adoptant une méthodologie spatiale, dans laquelle le royaume anabaptiste est interprété comme un théâtre social délibérément et minutieusement conçu, concentré sur une représentation des pouvoirs, que l’incompréhensible devient finalement compréhensible.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0160.038
Scholarly communication0.0140.007
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and Reformation→Same topicReformation and Early Modern Christianity→French-language works237,207→