Book Review: <i>Family and Justice in the Archives: Historical Perspectives on Intimacy and the Law</i> by Gossage Peter and Moore Lisa, eds. PeterGossageLisaMoore, eds. 2024. <i>Family and Justice in the Archives: Historical Perspectives on Intimacy and the Law</i> . Montreal: Concordia University Press. 442 pp. $64.95 (Paperback), ISBN: 9781988111438.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
dioceses tried very hard to convince couples to abandon such marriage projects by claiming a number of dire consequences would result: childless unions, marital discord, or economic ruin were all predicted to be likely outcomes.After 1868, however, the situation became more complicated with the passage of the May Laws, which, among other things, introduced emergency civil marriage.It was now possible for couples to establish a marriage which was "valid before the state without observing canon law requirements" (318).The church saw this option as a threat to its power over marriage, and as such, the situation gave couples a powerful new tool in their struggle to get permission to marry.Lanzinger says that couples were far more likely to use the threat of civil marriage as a cudgel with which to try to intimidate church officials, rather than actually following through with such a marriage.While church officials found civil marriage a horrifying prospect, once again church power "proved quite effective at combatting innovation on the part of the state" (344).The final section of the chapter analyses the statistics of kin marriage, which Lanzinger admits are fragile.This situation is problematic because, as Lanzinger admits, it cannot be known how many couples were successfully discouraged by the church from marrying, and as she shows, those noted in the dispensation records formed only a very small percentage of the total numbers who married in the dioceses.This apparently small population offers only slender support for Lanzinger's broad claim that kinship remained a relevant analytic category in the nineteenth century.What the book does successfully show, is that the dispensation procedures are an illuminating lens through which to explore the tensions and competition between church and state and the responses of often ordinary people in trying to negotiate this environment.Scholars seeking to understand marriage law in Catholic areas will find this study invaluable.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".