MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3190911172 · doi:10.33137/rr.v44i1.37043

The Case of Catherine Dammartin: Friends, Fellows, and the Survival of Celibacy in England’s Protestant Universities

2021· article· en· W3190911172 on OpenAlexaffvenue
K. J. Kesselring

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCelibacyProtestantismWifeCeremonyCounterpointReligious studiesGender studiesHistorySociologyArtTheologyPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Catherine Dammartin began her adult life as a nun in Metz but ended it in 1553 as a wife in an Oxford college. First laid to rest in Christ Church Cathedral, her corpse was later removed as a pollutant then finally restored in a ceremony that saw her bones mixed with those of the virgin St. Frideswide. This article revisits Dammartin’s story to explore what it can tell us of the affective, sexual, and gendered dimensions of England’s Reformation. It argues that the Oxford Protestants who arranged her reburial did so to intervene in the debate about clerical marriage, a debate in which they were only partially successful. Dammartin was one of the first and last wives to live in college for a very long time. Her story offers a reminder that despite the shift to clerical marriage, England’s universities remained—somewhat distinctively within Protestant Europe—sites where celibacy continued as the norm: sites of homosocial bonding and fellowship that served as a counterpoint to otherwise dominant codes of masculine behaviour that privileged the Protestant paterfamilias.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0430.020
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.201 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and Reformation→Same topicReformation and Early Modern Christianity→French-language works237,207→