“Las fineças de buscar sienpre occasiones para que los ingenios de aca soliçiten su amistad y doctrina”. Juan Francisco Andrés de Uztarroz, José Pellicer y la construcción de una reputación en los círculos letrados españoles de los años 1640
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo propone un análisis de las buenas prácticas eruditas de la República de las letras españolas en el segundo tercio del siglo XVII, a través de un estudio de la ingente correspondencia manuscrita del cronista aragonés Juan Francisco Andrés de Uztarroz. Más allá del ineludible relato de las rivalidades personales y ambiciones áulicas, protagonizadas por los principales historiadores del momento, de Tomás Tamayo de Vargas a José Pellicer, pasando por Rodrigo Caro y Lorenzo Ramírez de Prado, los debates en los que participan los miembros de esta amplia red epistolar alimentan reflexiones alrededor de la ética y la etiqueta de los eruditos modernos. Así, entre consideraciones sobre el quehacer del historiador y polémicas literarias, Uztarroz y sus corresponsales reflexionan sobre la autoridad, la fama (tanto la de los textos como la de las personas), el crédito (que se otorga a uno o que uno se apropia), el respeto (que se gana y que se pierde) y la amistad (ofrecida o retirada).
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".