Bibliographic record
Abstract
近世フランスにおけるポール＝ロワイヤル修道院の歴史と記憶の形成過程を明らかにする研究に従事した。 ポール＝ロワイヤルの歴史に関しては、まず十七世紀後半に同修道院で繰り広げられた歴史記述の試みを検討すべく、関連する先行研究の収集・分析を行った。その上で、夏季休暇を利用して渡仏し、パリの関係諸機関において、現在残されている複数のポール＝ロワイヤル史の元になった史料群の追跡調査を実施した。その結果、劇作家ジャン・ラシーヌが十七世紀末に執筆し未完に終わった『ポール＝ロワイヤル史概要』が、ポール＝ロワイヤルをめぐる歴史記述の最初の成果として極めて重要な意味をもつ史料であることが明らかになり、その全訳と註解に取り組んだ。全体の四分の一ほどについて、詳細な註を付した日本語訳を作成し、さらに文書全体について解説を執筆したが、研究成果の公表には至らなかった。 ポール＝ロワイヤルの記憶の形成については、十七世紀後半から十八世紀にかけてのジャンセニスム論争と深く関わっていることが予想されたため、この論争の展開と背後にある政治的宗教的な要因の追跡に力点が置かれた。その結果、十七世紀中葉からジャンセニスム論争を導いてきた神学者たちの多くが世紀末に相次いで没することでポール＝ロワイヤルは確かに衰退し、十八世紀初頭にルイ十四世の命で破壊されるに至ったものの、その後継者たちが「偉大な世紀」におけるこの殉教の記憶を利用して大勅書「ウニゲニトゥス」（一七一三）に抵抗戦線を張る過程で十七世紀のポール＝ロワイヤルに関する史料の編纂と歴史の叙述に心血を注いだため、その過程で、消滅したポール＝ロワイヤルが一種の神話として受容された可能性が浮かび上がった。 The objective of this project is to reveal the process of formation of Port-Royal's history and memory in early modern France. For historical aspect, it was necessary to analyze in French libraries primary sources in regard to the historiography of Port-Royal. As a result of this research Jean Racine's Abrégé de l'histoire de Port-Royal, the first historiographical attempt on this monastery, was found to be important. I therefore undertook an as-yet unpublished translation with annotations and commentary on a quarter of this text. To shed new light on the formation of the memory of Port-Royal, an investigation was conducted on the politico-religious background of the Jansenist controversy from the 17th to the 18th century. Port-Royal monastery was definitively destroyed by Louis XIV in the early 18th century. However, the successors of the Age of Enlightenment used the memory of this martyrdom in the "Great Century" to campaign against the papal bull "Unigenitus" (1713). Through this campaign, Port-Royal was probably accepted as a kind of myth.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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".