MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124089440 · doi:10.7202/1073371ar

Les Jeux d’Enfants, tapisseries italiennes et flamandes pour les Gonzague

2020· article· en· W3124089440 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Guy Delmarcel, Clifford M. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAltarArtTheme (computing)Art historyApolloHumanitiesComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two sets of tapestries depicting Puttini can be related to the patronage of the Gonzaga family. On his death in 1563, Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga possessed a series of 15 tapestries with Puttini designed by Giulio Romano and woven in the workshop of Nicholas Karcher, probably during his stay in Mantua between 1539 and 1545. The iconography of the four complete surviving panels relates only casually to the description of the puttini in Philostratos’s Images. As the patron of the set, Cardinal Ercole might have wished an emblematic ambiguity for these scenes with reference both to pagan Dionysiac life and to the Christian eucharistic theme of wine. Accordingly, the so-called Bark of Venus might be interpreted in several ways. Ercole’s inventory of 1563 also mentions a set of twelve spallere or dorsal tapestries with “Fortune led by four Eagles.” Giulio Romano’s design in Haarlem, where the woman holding a rudder may stand for Fortuna, can be related to these now lost weavings. As the woman in the Bark of Venus also holds a rudder, she probably alludes to Fortuna leading the good fame of Ercole whose coat of arms appears on the top of the weaving and whose name is written by a genius on a cartellino on the foreground. Moreover, as the general scheme of this tapestry is closely related to that of the Miraculous Draught of Fishes in Raphael’s Acts of the Apostles set, the Bark of Venus/Fortune might be presumed to have an underlying Christian meaning. Ercole’s younger brother, Ferrante, founder of the Guastalla branch of the Gonzaga family, ordered a similar set of Puttini from the Brussels workshop of Willem de Pannemaker. This can be deduced from correspondence with Cardinal Granvella in 1571-74 concerning a copy of these tapestries from the same weaver. When the painter Giovanni Battista Lodi proposed in February 1552 to entrust Ferrante’s order for tapestries woven with gold and silver to Willem de Pannemaker, he was unquestionably referring to the Marzotto Puttini, the only series with precious metal in the Gonzaga collection, where it can be traced until 1709. Thereafter, the set can be documented in various Venetian collections until it was acquired by its present owner, the Marzotto family in Trissino. The copies made for Granvella, partially preserved in the Spanish Royal Collection, are identical to the six Marzotto tapestries. Both sets bear the mark of Pannemaker, but the Marzotto tapestries made for Ferrante are the first edition. The Brussels Puttini set relies on Northern Italian models, either from the workshop of Giulio Romano or from Milanese painters. Unlike the set created for Cardinal Ercole, many details made it clear that the cartoons created for Ferrante were designed in Flanders. The six pieces, representing the harvest of the grapes, the pressing of the wine, and the dance are thus devoted to the theme of Dionysiac paradise and peace as a dialectical complement to Ferrante’s older Brussels set of the Fructus Belli. The building in the right background of the Dance probably represents, at least in an idealized way, the Villa Gualtiera-Simonetta, Ferrante’s residence in Milan.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207