“The Shire of Bedford and The Earldom of Huntingdon.”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the article which forms pp. 23-34 was printed, the writer noticed a surprising entry on the Close Roll of 1248, by which the Escheators in Hunts, and Cambs. are ordered “that, with regard to the revenue of Simon de sancto Licio in Huntindon’ from the third penny of the County, which the King caused to be taken into his own hand by reason that in these days there is no Earl of Huntindon’, they cause him again to have (rehabere) full seisin, provided that according to justice he answer for it in the King's Court to his summons.” This seems to be the only case as yet noticed of the allowance of the third penny of the County to one who had no claims on an Earldom. The nearest comparable case seems to be that of Hugh de Courtenay; he was a distant kinsman of the last of the family de Reviers, Earls of Devon, and succeeded to their estates about 1293; he claimed the third penny of Devon from the Sheriff, and it was allowed at the Exchequer till about 1325/6, when the Treasurer disallowed it on the ground that Hugh was not the Earl; Hugh protested, and finally was created Earl of Devon with full grant of the third penny, and was acquitted of the claims made by the Exchequer for what he had irregularly received in the last 8J years. A serious search of the Pipe Rolls of the period has not been possible, but no payment to Simon de St. Liz of the third penny appears in the Rolls for 1248, 1249, 1250; it might have been paid in some other way. Both in these three years and earlier is an allowance for ‘lands granted’ (terrae datae) “to the heirs of the Earl of Huntendon 40li in Brampton and Alemundebiri” (Brampton and Alconbury co. Hunts., royal lands at Domesday). It seemed worth while to attempt to trace this highly favoured recipient, but as the eldest son of the family seems always to have been called Simon, the separation of successive generations is merely inferential.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.006 |
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".