Travaux sur la censure et les index des livres interdits réalisés à l’Université de Sherbrooke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’invention de l’imprimerie au XVe siècle s’avère un puissant facteur de diffusion des idées dont se servent les autorités civiles et religieuses ainsi que le mouvement humaniste. Quand au XVIe siècle l’imprimerie devient le principal moyen de diffusion de la Réforme protestante, les autorités ecclésiastiques et civiles qui restent fidèles à l’Église romaine essaient d’empêcher l’impression, la vente, la possession et la lecture des ouvrages hétérodoxes. C’est ainsi qu’on assiste à la parution des premières listes des ouvrages et des auteurs condamnés, désignés comme index des livres interdits. Cette pratique de la Contre-réforme officialisée par le Concile de Trente est d’une importance toute particulière au XVIe siècle. Elle devient par la suite une arme importante pour défendre le catholicisme contre ses ennemis extérieurs et intérieurs et se perpétue jusqu’au concile Vatican II, au milieu du XXe siècle. Pendant une quarantaine d’années, le Centre d’Études de la Renaissance de l’Université de Sherbrooke a consacré de nombreuses recherches à l’étude des index du XVIe siècle et des index postérieurs publiés par l’Inquisition espagnole et par les Congrégations romaines de l’Index et du Saint-Office. Ces recherches ont donné lieu à plusieurs publications dont les 12 volumes de la collection Index des livres interdits. The invention of printing in the fifteenth century was an important factor in the dissemination of ideas that served civic and religious authorities as well as the humanist movement. When, in the sixteenth century, printing became the primary means of spreading the Protestant Reformation, civic and ecclesiastical authorities who remained faithful to the Roman Catholic church attempted to halt the printing, sale, possession, and reading of heterodox works. It is thus that we witness the birth of the first lists of forbidden books and authors, which were given the title “Index of Prohibited Books.” This Counter-Reformation practice, formalized by the Council of Trent, was of particular importance in the sixteenth century. It became, over time, an important means of defending Catholicism against its external and internal enemies, and the practice continued until Vatican II in the mid-twentieth century. Over the past four decades, the Centre d’Études de la Renaissance de l’Université de Sherbrooke has devoted many studies to the indices of the sixteenth century and to those published later by the Spanish Inquisition and by the Roman Curia’s Congregations for the Index and for the Holy Office. This research has produced many publications, in particular the twelve volumes of the collection Index des livres interdits.
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 | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.066 | 0.007 |
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".