Going Steady; What Did It Look Like To Go From Single To Married in Renaissance Italy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
My research focuses on what it looked like to find love in Renaissance Italy. This paper is chiefly concerned with the stages of courtship and engagement leading to marriage in early modern Italy for the purpose of understanding such an intimate, consequential, and complex experience that reveals the multitude and stratification of experiences within Italy. Currently missing from the scholarship is a synthesized presentation of the development from single-hood to courtship to marriage and married life, and sometimes annulment or divorce. I will draw on a variety of primary and secondary sources across the socio-economic spectrum to illustrate what ‘dating’, engagements, weddings, and married life looked like across Early Modern Italy. This paper presents a comprehensive and linear account of what an individual's experience was on the path to heterosexual marriage, beginning with how couples met each other and what the initial stage of flirting and courtship looked like. In order to best interpret the findings, I have used an interdisciplinary approach in order to better understand the complexities of the topic that are, like much of social history, often reluctant to reveal themselves to historians.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".