MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390687636 · doi:10.1017/9781800109353.010

Minstrelsy in noble and ecclesiastical households

2023· other· en· W4390687636 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Gender and Feminism Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The domestic context Any householder is the head of a household, whatever its size. A small household may have little or no structure, but it will have financial or bartering transactions, and the building must be maintained. If a household employs servants there are wages to be paid, and at a certain size of the household some records are needed. Records may be secretarial or financial, and they depend on someone in the household (or someone brought in from outside) being literate and numerate. The households that concern us here are all of a considerable size. The king's household usually comprised around four hundred people, and some noble households approached the king's in size. In 4 Ed III the king gave liveries to a total of 669 persons, who would include members of dependent households and some servants who were not permanent members of any household. Many noble households supported minstrels – this livery-list named nineteen, as well as a waferer and three vigiles – and these roughly divide into three categories. First, the minstrels regularly employed by the head of the household, taking wages and annual fees, and normally being granted a livery in exchange for their allegiance to the principal; and some local minstrels employed, perhaps regularly, on an ad hoc basis. Second, the minstrels of important visitors, treated as honoured members of the visiting household: they normally performed during their visit, and would be rewarded accordingly. Third, some independent minstrels, or liveried minstrels not travelling with their patron or employer, would seek hospitality. These might be sent away without performing, perhaps receiving a small sum in compensation; or they might be allowed to perform, in which case they would be rewarded with money and a meal. All three categories of minstrel appear in the household accounts, although one cannot always identify the category to which a particular minstrel belonged. We have so far discussed only royal households, but both the secular and the ecclesiastical nobility maintained households that included minstrels. Some bishops and abbots kept at least one still minstrel as a personal household servant, and many gave rewards to visiting minstrels.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistorical Gender and Feminism StudiesFrench-language works237,207