Bibliographic record
Abstract
As an ideal type model for comparative historical sociological research, “patrimonialism” provides a useful framework for comparing complex societies. Especially important is the tendency for an “oscillation” of centripetal and centrifugal forces. Max Weber's oscillation thesis makes it clear he was not Eurocentric. The patrimonial state is based on a ruler and a traditional bureaucracy (with prebendal officials). The logic of Magna Carta (1225) requires that the monarch also accept a baronial class as having legitimate authority in addition to his own, but that only applied to England. Thomas Piketty utilizes patrimony to refer to the “heritage” of a bourgeois family in capitalist societies whereas Max Weber was interested in societies that existed long before the emergence of “modern capitalism” in its incipient phases in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Those premodern societies had long‐distance trade in luxury goods but only rudiments of modern capitalism. After the seventeenth century it became more and more common for the “imagined community” of the “nation‐state” to dominate in capitalist societies. But those societies often had overseas imperial interests and some established European settler colonies, such as England which established parts of South Asia as British colonies. Some use the term “neo‐patrimonial” to refer to contemporary societies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 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 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".