Bibliographic record
Abstract
The office of ecclesiastical notary has undergone several changes throughout history. The Roman notarius, a legal professional, could be a tabularius, a tabellio or an exceptor. The Church retained these professions but assembled them collectively under the title of notarius. The A. gives an interesting and sometimes humouristic account of the history surrounding the office of notary. Initially the A. looks firstly at the pontifical chancery notaries, the protonotaries apostolic, who, under Leo X, were scriptores papae. With the advent of the newly formed dicasteries in the XVI th century, the notaries lost considerable responsibility, but gained in prestige and privileges. With the 1917 Code, the title of protonotary became mostly honorary. The title of honorary protonotary had been assigned in the XV th century to members of the nobility. Following widespread abuses, it was reserved to clerics and today it is conferred to certain canons and prelates. The A. then describes the responsibilities of diocesan chancery notaries. Their original responsibility was limited to reading and writing letters and reports. In the 1917Code, they acquired the fides pmblica - their signature authenticated acts of the curia, Then the offices of judicial notaries are explained, both in the tribunals and the Roman ecclesiastical courts. Finally, the office of notary public is explained. The notary apostolic in the XVI th century kingdom of France was governed by the state and eventually the notary public became the only category of notaries in France. The history of the notary apostolic in the Papal States is also examined. Finally, the interaction that ecclesiastical notaries have had with civil law is briefly explored.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.005 |
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".