MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1493045885

Fashion and Self-Fashioning: Clothing Regulation in Renaissance Europe

2011· article· en· W1493045885 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kayla Arnold

Bibliographic record

VenueSound Ideas (University of Puget Sound) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFashion and Cultural Textiles
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingThe RenaissanceArtAestheticsVisual artsArt historyHistoryArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The advent of true fashion in Italy during the 1350s introduced a new system of values to a society whose members were becoming increasingly concerned with self-presentation. The new social and economic changes that arose during the Renaissance began challenging existing social hierarchies and forced groups to display their status through their apparel and be able to recognize other groups through theirs as well. As a result, during the Renaissance the regulation of clothing became a way for city officials to define different social, religious and gender groups as well as maintain the boundaries between them. This paper analyzes sources produced between 1350 and 1600, ranging from sumptuary legislation to popular literature, in order to examine the social, moral and economic motivations of clothing regulation during this period. Specifically, elite men, elite women, prostitutes and Jews are examined in this paper in order to see how each group was affected by, and responded to, such regulation. The conclusions drawn by this analysis demonstrate that an attempt was being made by the governing bodies of Italy to separate groups based on their social and moral status. This research adds to our understanding of the interactions between social, gender and religious groups of the Italian Renaissance and helps to situate the history of clothing within a social and ideological context.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSound Ideas (University of Puget Sound)Same topicFashion and Cultural TextilesFrench-language works237,207