MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Cardinals

2012· reference-entry· en· W4233212945 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stella Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2012
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBishopsPower (physics)Value (mathematics)HistoryGenealogyLawClassicsMathematicsTheologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyPhysicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deriving from the Latin cardo (hinge), cardinals were originally priests permanently attached to particular churches. Roman cardinals were beneficiaries of the 11th- and 12th-century reforms that sought to diminish secular influence over the church by centralizing power in the person of the pope. They emerged from that process with enhanced individual and corporate powers. The 1059 codification of rules governing papal elections made them the principal electors of popes. This was refined by the Third Lateran Council (1179), which decreed that cardinals were the sole electors of popes, that their votes were of equal value with no distinction between those of cardinal-bishops, cardinal-priests, and cardinal-deacons, and that a two-thirds majority was required to secure an election. Between conclaves, popes and cardinals met together in regular consistories from c. 1130. Cardinals began to hold administrative offices within the Roman curia and to act as legates a latere, sent “from the side” of the pope to exercise his power in specific regions of Christendom. Their authority was further enhanced when they became protectors of newly reformed and centralized religious orders. Cardinals’ red hats were exclusively the gift of the popes who, from the 15th century onward, used them as diplomatic tools in their relations with the secular powers. Between 1350 and 1650 nearly one thousand individuals were made cardinals, even if approximately one tenth of that total have since been identified as “pseudo-cardinals,” the creations of antipopes. In this bibliography, Reference Works precede General Overviews, which deal with groups of cardinals. Collections of Papers include studies of individual cardinals and are therefore particularly useful for comparative purposes. Thereafter, attention focuses on the composition, privileges, and responsibilities of the Sacred College, with subsections devoted to particular features of their life in Rome (and Avignon): Cardinals in Conclaves for their role in papal elections, Cardinal Protectors for some of their functions between conclaves, and Cardinals’ Houses and Households for other aspects of their ecclesiastical and cultural patronage. The vast majority of scholarship relating to cardinals has been biographical in nature, which is why the remainder of the present work divides the subject chronologically, into Cardinals Created before 1471, Cardinals Created between 1471 and 1503, Cardinals Created between 1503 and 1534, Cardinals Created between 1534 and 1549, and Cardinals Created after 1549. In each there is a selection of primary sources and secondary literature, identified as “Sources” and “Studies,” respectively.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2840.126

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.251
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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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