A. Lynn Martin . Alcohol, Violence, and Disorder in Traditional Europe . (Early Modern Studies, number 2.) Kirksville : Truman State University Press . 2009 . Pp. ix, 269. $48.00.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the late 1960s, anthropologists Craig MacAndrew and Robert B. Edgerton teamed up to study how people in different cultures behave when they are intoxicated. The book that came out of that project, Drunken Comportment: A Social Explanation (1969), created a sensation, for it said that drunken behavior is learned and varies from culture to culture. People in some cultures become aggressive when they drink; people in others do not. The same logic led MacAndrew and Edgerton to conclude that the norms governing drunken comportment can and do change as a culture changes, and that cultures are perfectly capable of having different scripts for different settings. Aggressive behavior may be acceptable in some settings and unacceptable in others. I mention Drunken Comportment because it is the touchstone of A. Lynn Martin's work. In his book, Martin casts a wide net, covering four centuries (1300–1700) and three different drinking cultures (England, France, and Italy). Under the circumstances, it is surprising that he finds so few variations over time and across cultures—Italians drank the most but complained the least, women were vaguely more tolerated in drinking establishments in England than they were in France and Italy, and English law was distinctive because it deemed drunkenness an aggravating factor in the commission of a crime. In each century and in each culture he returns to the same conclusion: high levels of drinking did not correlate with high levels of interpersonal violence, and if there was any correlation, it was because drinking establishments inevitably attracted a rogues' gallery of “thieves, gangs of criminals, prostitutes and their pimps, gamblers, vagabonds, and other denizens of the underworld” (p. 161).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".