<i>‘We are All Servants’: The Diversity of Service in Premodern Europe (1000–1700)</i>, ed. Isabelle Cochelin and Diane Wolfthal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
What did squires, wet nurses, recluses, kings, domestic workers and ladies-in-waiting have in common? The title of the book—quoted from the late medieval devotional text Meditationes vitae Christi—neatly sums it up: they all served. This well-structured and cross-epochal volume explores the ubiquity and diversity of service in Western Europe from the Middle Ages to the early modern period. Bringing together scholars from various career stages and disciplines such as history, art history, religious and literary studies, this volume, edited by Isabelle Cochelin and Diane Wolfthal, rightly argues that the study of service is crucial to understanding pre-modern European society. As a normative model of society, a structuring force for human relations, and an individual life experience, service could take on many forms and mean different things over time—be it a remunerated labour relation with regular payments or a mutual commitment in which the one serving hoped for a benevolent gesture at the end of service.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".