Keizer, Joost. Leonardo’s Paradox: Work and Image in the Making of Renaissance Culture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
comptes rendus 233 Jesuits ministered to the Christian community as an extension of Catholic reform, cautiously avoiding any efforts to convert the Muslim population.Although the missionary work of European mendicants and Jesuits is the primary focus of the Companion, several authors acknowledge the evangelizing efforts of non-Europeans.Christensen refers to indigenous people as "spiritual conquistadors" (27) in Mexico, Wilde notes that the Guaraní wrote sermons in Paraguay, Strathern highlights the role of local proselytizers in Africa, and Županov references the work of Brahman catechists in India.It is false to assume that only ordained Europeans in religious garb spread the Christian gospel in the Americas, Africa, and Asia.Indigenous peoples performed missionary roles as preachers and teachers, and in several notable cases were even recognized as martyrs.These aspects of global Catholic missions are not sufficiently treated in the Companion and deserve more attention in future research.Each essay includes a brief survey of mission historiography specific to the geographic region under discussion, although there are no accompanying maps of mission zones or images of religious artwork, both of which would have served as helpful visual aids.The Companion, despite a few minor shortcomings, will be welcomed as a useful tool for scholars seeking to expand their understanding of mission history and for undergraduate students enrolled in world history courses.The global spread of Christianity was an integral part of the early modern period, and one that is better understood when historiographic silos are broken down.This is exactly what the Companion offers, and it does not disappoint.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| 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".