MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7044271721

Witches and Familiars. The discourse of witchcraft in Jacobean England

2016· article· en· W7044271721 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueConsultation of the Doctoral Thesis Database (TESEO) (Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWitchThroneLegislationConvictionEnglish lawPeriod (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the Middle Ages, witchcraft had been a matter of concern for most Europeans.However, English legislation was relatively tolerant compared to the rest of the continent.In fact, from the 16 th century onwards, there was a gradual shift from ecclesiastical to secular courts, which meant that it was usually Justices who supervised the whole examination process of presumed witches not members of the Church.But the arrival of James VI of Scotland at the English throne in 1603 meant a shift towards harsher policies concerning witches.The monarch had a wide knowledge about continental literature on the topic -he had even published his Daemonologie (1597) where he presented his arguments for the existence of witches-and was already familiar with witchcraft processes.New legislation was passed and the king would use all the means at his disposal to spread his ideas, which owed a lot to continental theory.But his influence was perceived not only in judicial aspects but also in the growing number of literature works which dealt with the subject.This paper aims at analysing how witchcraft processes were staged in the early Jacobean theatre, how not only pamphlets but also theatre plays had a part in what Clifford Geertz called "control mechanisms for the governing of behaviour."During the Elizabethan period, the theatre was an effective means of controlling the masses, of imposing the values the ruling class wanted to spread, and James I was fully aware of that and used it to his advantage.The Witch of Edmonton, written in 1621, echoes the well-known case of the conviction of Elizabeth Sawyer and presents its audience with a more detailed account than that of Henry Goodcole's pamphlet on the trial and eventual execution of the convicted witch.I shall also analyse how both pieces of writing were used to build up the dominant discourse on witchcraft, a discourse which was shaped by the power institutions.This paper will particularly focus on the description of Sawyer's dog and how it reflects the official position on the keeping of familiars, which under the 1604 Act had become an offence in the English jurisdiction.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.215 · 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