MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208554959 · doi:10.1163/18712428-bja10016

The Devil of Delft in England

2021· article· en· W3208554959 on OpenAlexafffund
Gary K. Waite

Bibliographic record

VenueChurch History and Religious Culture · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Cambridge
KeywordsProtestantismConfessionalHeresyMysticismRepentanceHistoryReligious studiesDenialConfession (law)New englandClassicsLiteratureArtTheologyLawPhilosophyPolitical scienceArchaeologyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Dutch glasspainter and Anabaptist prophet David Joris (1501–1556) was the Netherland’s most infamous heretic who became a spiritualist who depreciated the scriptures, condemned confessional conflict, and argued that the devil did not exist external to a person’s mind. Unlike the Dutch founder of the Family of Love, Hendrik Niclaes, Joris had no following in England, yet English writers condemned him with increasing frequency over seventeenth century. This paper examines that response, showing that for most writers Joris was the exemplar of the dangers of visionary mysticism, while Catholics used him to condemn Protestantism in general. English writers remained largely unaware of Joris’s denial of demons until ca. 1647, when they began to attack the idea, unintentionally publicizing it. Such polemical dissemination had decades earlier helped to calm fears of demonic witchcraft in the Dutch Republic; in England it may have also influenced the demonologies of some English nonconformists.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChurch History and Religious CultureSame topicReformation and Early Modern ChristianityFrench-language works237,207