Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interest in women’s work in the Renaissance and Reformation book trades has been stimulated by the maturation of two important scholarly fields: the study of women’s literature and history, and the history of the book. Pettegree’s The Book in the Renaissance (Pettegree 2010, cited under General Overviews) exemplifies the ways in which recent scholarship has established the emergence of print as central to the production and articulation of national identity, religious reform, and international scholarly communities. The books and articles listed in the first half of this bibliography reveal much about women’s participation in the book trades across Europe and into the New World, but also make it clear that there is significant work still to be done, both in the form of individual, local, or national case studies, and in the form of ambitious comparative research. Seeking out the particularities of women’s engagement in the work of publication and with the products of the early modern book trade not only illuminates the operations of printing and bookselling in this period, but also pushes scholars to take a wide view of “publication” and of the role of consumers (purchasers, readers, and patrons) in shaping the print marketplace. The second half of this bibliography, largely but not wholly restricted to the English example, details important work on women and manuscript or scribal publication, how women entered into print and were presented (or presented themselves) as female authors, how print itself was imaginatively gendered, and women’s influence as buyers and readers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".