Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 1524 uprising of evangelical artisans in Augsburg on behalf of the Franciscan preacher Johann Schilling counts as a turning point of the Reformation movement in that city. Relying on chronicles, government reports, and interrogation records, previous scholarship—none better than Jörg Rogge’s— has exposed the egalitarian theology and the social, economic, and political critique that united Schilling’s supporters. Yet the source of their ideology has always been unclear, for Schilling left behind neither treatises nor sermon transcriptions. That lacuna can be filled in part by re-examining sources largely overlooked: the four pamphlets published in 1524 by the weaver Ulrich (Utz) Richsner. A contextual reading of those pamphlets suggests a close collaboration between Schilling and Richsner, and a much more central role for Richsner in the movement around Schilling than has yet been recognized. La révolte en 1524 des artisans évangéliques d’Augsbourg pour le compte du prédicateur franciscain Johann Schilling est considérée comme un tournant dans le mouvement de réforme de cette ville. En se basant sur des chroniques, des rapports gouvernementaux et des minutes d’interrogatoires, la recherche — incluant les travaux inégalés de Jörg Rogge — a mis en lumière la théologie égalitaire ainsi que la critique sociale, économique et politique qui ont rassemblé les partisans de Schilling. Toutefois, les sources de cette pensée n’ont jamais été clarifiées, puisque Schilling n’a laissé ni écrits, ni transcriptions de sermons. Cette lacune peut être partiellement comblée en réexaminant des sources qui jusqu’à maintenant ont été négligées, c’est-à-dire les quatre libelles publiés en 1524 par le tisserand Ulrich (Utz) Richsner. Une lecture de ces textes dans leur contexte suggère une collaboration étroite entre Schilling et Richsner, ainsi qu’un rôle beaucoup plus important de Richsner dans le mouvement entourant le procès de Schilling, deux aspects méritant davantage notre attention.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".