The English Reformation: Religion and Cultural Adaptation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Norman Jones continues his nuanced investigations into the social history of the English Reformation, this time through a series of case studies of various headings ranging from the family and communities to the post-Reformation world view.Jones is one of our best observers of the Tudor century with its myriad shifts and ironies: his analyses disclose a precise and practiced archivist coupled with a writer of particular flair with an eye for telling details.Jones deftly walks us through a wide cross-section of reactions, adaptations, and innovations to the religious changes of the sixteenth century from Henry VIII to Elizabeth I.Among many strengths, this work tracks changes over generations, and Jones delights in introducing us to the devils in the details.We read with interest, for example, how the abolition of obits under Edward VI had little effect on the ability of the fellows of Merton College to collect bequests left to them under the old system, or how two stalwart antagonists -Thomas More and Christopher St.German -attempted to fuse law and conscience in their jurisprudence.Particularly interesting is the short chapter treating the post-Reformation world view; here Jones sets himself a daunting challenge, and his succinct conclusion should be read by all students of Tudor history: the key, or "accidental genius" of the Elizabethan Settlement was flexibility.Jones's latest work will stand for a good long while, not merely on the considerable merits of its insights and the deftness of his method, but also because its author is a master of the genre.The book is an unqualified pleasure to read.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".