MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902141317 · doi:10.1353/his.2018.0026

From Rome to Montreal: Importing Relics of Catacomb Saints Through Ultramontane Networks, 1820-1914

2018· article· en· W2902141317 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Michel Dahan

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPietyPower (physics)Ancient historyHistoryArtReligious studiesClassicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores one of the most intriguing Catholic devotions of the nineteenth century: how relics of Roman catacomb saints came to occupy a significant place in the religious beliefs and practices of many Montreal Catholics. From 1820 to the early twentieth century, these ancient remains were brought from Rome to Montreal and placed under the altars of churches. The devotion to catacomb saints, this article argues, demonstrates how ultramontane piety developed and was experienced in Montreal. It also reveals how the belief in the miraculous power of these relics shaped Quebec's Catholic culture. Abstract: Le présent article traite de l'une des plus curieuses dévotions du XIXe siècle chez les catholiques : la manière dont les reliques de saints provenant des catacombes de Rome en sont venues à occuper une place importante dans les croyances et les pratiques religieuses de nombreux catholiques montréalais. De 1820 jusqu'au début du XXe siècle, ces restes anciens ont été apportés de Rome à Montréal et placés sous les autels des églises. L'auteur fait valoir que la dévotion aux saints des catacombes témoigne du développement et de l'expression de la piété ultramontaine à Montréal. Il révèle aussi comment la croyance au pouvoir miraculeux de ces reliques a façonné la culture catholique québécoise.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire socialeSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207