Banquets and Power: Boiardo's <i>Innamorato</i> and the Politics of Gastronomy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Power shapes people's social and political consciousness and, although it rarely reflects a consciousness of self, it is ever mindful of the privileged modes to which it is entitled. It can be displayed through a variety of means, all of which are a deliberate expression and consolidation of grandeur and authority. Foodstuffs as a socio-political metaphor lend itself quite naturally as a tool carving social identity. Aristotle in his Politics (1256a) characterizes the consumption of different foodstuffs in terms of the dissimilar "ways of life" that it produced. The terms of his argument appear inverted in the Renaissance when sophisticated lifestyles were believed to require the consumption of refined food. As we know from extant treatises, the culture and mentality of self-indulgent court life favoured a diet based on rare delicacies elaborately prepared. This type of dietary conventions defined social identity and, by emphasizing cultural divisions and social hierarchy, it effectively conferred a status-building trait to gastronomy. For this reason, the staging of stupendous banquets in Renaissance Italy became another vehicle to express princely power. Through these lavish productions that ensured self-aggrandizement, princes marked social as well as religious events, political alliances, and spe- cial loyalties.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".