Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the wake of the English Civil Wars of the 1640s, increased religious tolerance gave rise to unprecedented religious radicalism. While most emerging religious sects adopted unorthodoxinterpretations of the Bible, some sects were more radical than others. The Diggers, led by Gerrard Winstanley, were unique in that their biblically inspired focus on private property’s inherent corruption drove them to establish an agricultural commune in Surrey in 1649. By setting an example for the rest of the world and encouraging others to adopt their methods, they hoped to ultimately restore the Earth to a state of ‘Common Treasury.’ Drawing on scriptural precedent and personal interpretation of the Bible, Winstanley offered an eloquent, politically charged justification for the Diggers’ program of communal living in The True Levellers Standard (1649), which became the Digger manifesto. It pointedly critiquedseventeenth-century English society, had both a positive and negative impact on the Diggers’ reception at the time, and survived the movement’s violent suppression and subsequent collapse. Today, it continues to offer great insight into the origins, development and fate of the Digger movement, while at the same time inspiring modern scholars to delve deeper into the movement’s significance, and raising questions about property and equality that remain highly relevant in this day and age.
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".