Trifling Things? The Sara Lewes Memorial<i>Lepel</i>and<i>Vork</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A case study of the Sara Lewes memorial vork (fork) and lepel (spoon), rare survivals in silver from the seventeenth century made in a Dutch colony in about 1672 to commemorate the decease of a woman named Sara Lewes, considers how these objects may have been produced, consumed and valued in the context of early modern trade networks. In the Dutch Auricular style, this cutlery serves as our starting point for a wide-ranging consideration of the cross-cultural life of such objects, including translations of form and transculturations of meaning in the early modern era. During a time of rapidly expanding Dutch trade networks, these artefacts were widely travelled and exhibit a complicated biography. As a rarely noticed by-product of the activities of the Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie or VOC), and the Dutch West India Company (Geoctroyeerde Westindische Compagnie or WIC), which were driving forces in the growth and expansion of the Dutch Empire, the Dutch forged a genuinely global material culture, in which artefacts and decorative art styles travelled often and easily from Batavia in the east to New Netherland in the west, and beyond. Compelling, and contradictory sets of evidence are presented to prove that the Lewes cutlery was made in New Netherland and in Batavia. However, where these trifles were made is of little consequence as their true importance lies in the story they tell about the global transmission of decorative art styles during the Golden Age of the Dutch Republic.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".