Surviving Dynastic Change: The High Nobility during the War of the Spanish Succession (1701–15)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The accession of the House of Bourbon to the Spanish throne after the death of the last Habsburg king, Carlos II, in 1700 brought important changes for the court high nobility. Historians have seen Philip V’s reign as the beginning of the titled nobility’s withdrawal from the front line of politics. The process, encouraged by the Bourbon’s reformism during the War of the Spanish Succession, was carried out by the nobility in several ways. This article will analyze the careers of aristocrats such as Pedro Manuel Colón de Portugal and José Solís y Valderrábano, dukes of Veragua and Montellano, and Rodrigo Fernández Manrique de Lara, Count of Frigiliana, who adapted their actions to the new regime’s politics in order to enjoy the patronage of new political actors. They took part in royal court circles to achieve important political positions without renouncing their right to oppose change through strategies linked to the political culture of the previous dynasty: for example, their involvement in political gatherings and their absence in important court celebrations. My article posits that, although the relations between the House of Bourbon and these nobles were undoubtedly complex and ambivalent, as their career at court shows, they were far more nuanced and fluid than has previously been revealed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".