Building the Chivalric Canon: Teofilo Folengo, Lodovico Domenichi, and Aretino’s Silence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the 1552 posthumous edition of Teofilo Folengo’s Macaronee, which included his masterpiece Baldus, and the preface to the work penned in late 1544/early 1545 by one Vigaso Cocaio. Following a suggestion by Luca Curti, who identified Vigaso with Lodovico Domenichi, I suggest including the Baldus in Domenichi’s publication programme of chivalric novels. This included Pulci’s Morgante and Boiardo’s Inamoramento de Orlando, both published in 1545. I argue that Folengo was originally part of Domenichi’s attempt at building a chivalric canon and I make some hypotheses as to why this programme was never fully accomplished. In doing so, I pay special attention to the relations between Domenichi, Folengo, and Pietro Aretino, suggesting that this latter may have played a role in the editorial history of Folengo’s macaronic works.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".