L’assassinat de François de Lorraine (1563) et la polarisation des publics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’assassinat de François de Guise par Poltrot de Méré, le 24 février 1563, eut un retentissement considérable dans l’opinion publique. Pendant que les protestants se réjouissaient, les catholiques rendirent au défunt un hommage en vers français et latins. Celui-ci fut orchestré par la maison des Guises et prit la forme d’une salve de plaquettes imprimées par le libraire parisien Thomas Richard qui connurent une diffusion en France et hors de ses frontières. C’est ce corpus méconnu de vers manuscrits écrits par les protestants et des plaquettes imprimées publiées par les catholiques que nous analysons, afin d’identifier les motifs, les acteurs et les conséquences de la polémique de 1563. Il s’agira aussi d’observer les mécanismes de cette offensive, notamment par le moyen de l’édition, et de reconstituer les modes de constitution de « publics » (auteurs et lecteurs) que s’efforcent de fédérer les deux partis antagonistes.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".