Desarbres, Paul-Victor, Émilie Le Borgne, Frank Lestringant, and Tristan Vigliano, eds. Guillaume Postel (1510–1581). Écrits et influences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To commemorate the 400th anniversary of the death of Guillaume Postel (1510-81), in September 1981, a colloquium on the sixteenth-century French scholar was organized at Avranches, France, chaired by Jean-Claude Margolin, who later edited a collected volume of essays, entitled Guillaume Postel, 1581-1981 (Paris: G. Trédaniel, 1985), significantly comprising a variety of methods and topics.Almost thirty years after Avranches, a new symposium was held online in March 2021, and a new volume of proceedings, edited by Paul-Victor Desarbres, Émilie Le Borgne, Frank Lestringant, and Tristan Vigliano, has repeated the original experiment of the Avranches colloque providing multiple perspectives that convey the complexity of Postel's intellectual production."Que savons-nous de plus sur Postel aujourd'hui […]?" ("What do we know more about Postel today […]?", 10; my translation), we might ask.A more thought-provoking question might be: Can we learn something new about Postel?In contrast to the paucity of literature on Guillaume Postel in English, the scholarship in French is quite vast, and of great note are, of course, the numerous studies of François Secret and his students.Nevertheless, there is still a vacuum in the literature when we come to some specific features of Guillaume Postel's thought and life.In particular, aspects not directly related to his study of the Hebrew language and the Jewish and Christian Kabbalah have often gone unremarked.Also, with few, though noteworthy, exceptions, most of Postel's manuscripts and published works lay unedited.The essays in the present volume, all in French, succeed in offering new perspectives on the Frenchman's thought and in giving new details on his manuscripts, works, and, in some cases, his networks.After the introduction, the twelve essays are grouped by topic into six parts and are followed by the conclusions, authored by Frank Lestringant, summing up the contents of the essays.Part 1, "Raisons de la concorde, " opens with Olivier Millet's essay.Millet offers an illuminating discussion of the idea of restitutio, nuancing our understanding of this crucial concept in Postel's philosophy.By situating Postel's restitutio in broader historical contexts, Millet
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.025 |
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".