Composing entries for the cartulary of Theuley in twelfth-century France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The foundation of the Cistercian abbey of Theuley, located in Burgundy, France, is described in its cartulary which was composed in the late twelfth or early thirteenth century. Despite an especially rich archive, Theuley has been little studied as a result of its distance from the chief cultural centres of Dijon, Langres and Besançon as well as the presence of a large number of its documents being in private hands. This thesis examines the first few entries of the cartulary by means of a careful historical analysis of the Latin text, aided by a comparison to other sources, both in manuscript and printed forms. All the studied texts in the cartulary have been found to use extracts from other formal documents, but with significant additions and deletions. In a few cases, the extracts themselves appear to be used in earlier donations with completely different donors and different witnesses. The author of the cartulary both deleted dates from the extracts and added a date to the foundation document. The composition of this cartulary was clearly not a simple copying of existing documents. This study thus contributes to the developing understanding of the varied nature of cartularies in the medieval world.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".