Sleeping Bodies, Jubilant Souls: The Fate of the Dead in Sweden 1400-1700
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the evolution of the popular view of death and dead bodies in the context of the massive social, political, and cultural changes that transformed Swedish religious and political life in the period between 1400 and 1600. In the Catholic High Middle Ages the evidence indicates that the commonly held belief was that the judgment of souls took place immediately following death. In this light the tomb had a primarily social function, serving as the link between the dead and the living by petitioning prayers to relieve the souls of the dead from the torments of purgatory, while the actual bodies of the dead seem to have held little importance in popular perception. With the Reformation, the death of purgatory, and the development of the absolutist monarchy these attitudes underwent radical change. The lack of a clearly articulated understanding of what happened to the body/soul while it awaited physical resurrection and judgment led to popular attitudes reflected by the use of the metaphor of sleep to explain the life of the dead. These beliefs, coupled with the growing effectiveness of royal government and royal law to intercede in private life, encouraged the development of attitudes that gave special emphasis to the corpse, and hence the body, as both the locus of identity/soul and the focus for punishment and judgment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".