MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413066471 · doi:10.1080/09612025.2025.2535054

Unveiling non-elite female knowledge: accusations of witchcraft and social networks in seventeenth-century Lisbon

2025· article· en· W4413066471 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen s History Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundació Catalana de TrasplantamentFundação para a Ciência e a TecnologiaFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsEliteHistoryPolitical scienceSociologyGender studiesAncient historyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, aims to examined the acquisition and dissemination of magical knowledge among non-elite women in urban Lisbon through the analysis of denunciations, testimonies, and statements from the 1637 trial of Maria de Ortega by the court of the Inquisition. I argue that this knowledge was produced and spread collectively within semi-intimate circles and that local social networks, resulting from their presence in public spaces, were crucial for the commercialization of magical practices, serving as a means of economic survival for these women. Their life stories and oral strategies before the Holy Office reflect the accumulated experiences and social dynamics of urban spaces, highlighting how diverse forms of knowledge were acquired and utilized to their advantage. For these women, witchcraft and sorcery functioned as a form of labor.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.217 · 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