Bibliographic record
Abstract
Except for the general expulsion of the Jews from England in 1290, the York massacre of 1190 is arguably the most momentous and disruptive event in the history of the relationship between Christians and Jews in medieval England. Contemporaries, both Christian and Jewish, in England and elsewhere remarked on the enormity of the massacre in which around one hundred and fifty people are estimated to have died. As a subject of historiography, the York massacre can be framed in different contexts. First of all, there is the wider history of the relationship between Christians and Jews in twelfth-century England. Secondly, there is the more immediate context of the late twelfth century which witnessed an increasing hostility towards Jews in England. Thirdly, there is a crusading context. The York massacre took place during the preparatory phase of the Third Crusade, in which the English King Richard I played a leading role. This makes sense because, since its beginnings at the end of the eleventh century, the crusade movement carried with it a potential for anti-Jewish violence which intermittently led to pogroms against Jews perpetrated by crusaders. The York massacre of 1190 can, in fact, be understood as a typical example of the structural violence with which the crusading movement confronted European Jewry. It is this third frame, that is the connections between crusading and the York massacre, which will be the focus of this article. The Dobson legacy In his foundational study published in 1974, Barrie Dobson clearly acknowledged the influence of the crusades on the York massacre. In his explanation, the period of the Third Crusade was the first time that English Jews were directly affected by the anti-Jewish tendencies of the crusades, in contrast to Jewish communities in France and Germany which had already been targets of crusader violence during the First and Second Crusades. Dobson's view was that ‘the massacres of the Jewish communities at York and elsewhere during early 1190 were unquestionably the product of the peculiar political and emotional tensions released by Richard I's departure on the Third Crusade’. His explanation of the anti-Jewish violence was based on developments ‘set in a national and indeed international context’, which he considered to be the product of ‘an increasing papal obsession with the dangers to Christian souls of intercourse with the Jews’.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.481 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".