Economics of Faith: Reforming Poor Relief in Early Modern Europe, by Esther Chung-Kim
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The early modern period, and the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in particular, witnessed considerable increases in poverty and significant changes in how European societies handled it. A long tradition of historical scholarship took the low-hanging fruit of theological distinctions and posited that Catholicism’s emphasis on spiritual benefits to givers rather than financial benefits to receivers only exacerbated poverty. Protestantism’s emphasis on God’s free grace (and the way this bypassed a complicated and expensive intercessory church whose clerical personnel claimed the bulk of alms for themselves as the Poor of Christ) apparently opened the way for more rational systems of effectively taking from each according to his ability and giving to each according to his needs. Marx added property and iron laws, while Weber and Trevelyan added mentalité and religion, but the fundamentals were in place for a clear distinction between a Catholicism which viewed poverty as a spiritual state and Protestantism, which took it as a social disgrace. Add a dose of secularism and voilà, enter the modern North European bureaucratic state suppressing ecclesiastical vested interests and trailing welfare benefits to a well-disciplined citizenry in its wake. Next stop: Scientific Revolution.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".