History of the Dukes of Normandy and the Kings of England by the anonymous of Bethune
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the first quarter of the thirteenth century, an anonymous Flemish writer set in writing, in Old French, a chronicle of Normandy, England, Flanders and northern France. It ranged from the arrival of the Vikings in Normandy to the early years of the reign of King Henry III of England, ending with an account of the translation of the relics of St Thomas Becket to their magnificent new shrine in Canterbury Cathedral in 1220. Along the way, it adopted and formed part of a tradition of writing of the history of the dukes of Normandy and kings of England, a tradition which had developed in Latin in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, and then continued in Old French. The work is famous for vibrant and informed description of the reign of King John, in particular the period of baronial reaction, Magna Carta, ensuing civil war and the nearly-successful invasion of England by Louis, heir to the kingdom of France. Flanders supplied troops to both sides, and this Flemish author sees these events in close detail, and from the Flemish, not the French or English, point of view. He may himself have been an eyewitness, directly involved, but if not he would have known many who had fought and died in this conflict. Janet Shirley’s translation of this chronicle, the first into English, brings the work of the Anonymous of Béthune to a new audience in this volume, accompanied by an introduction and historical notes by Paul Webster.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".