MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Casa of San Giorgio, Genoa

2022· reference-entry· en· W4287446928 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRenaissance and Reformation · 2022
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreditorDebtMonarchyRevenuePrerogativeEconomic historyFifteenthPoliticsPolitical scienceEconomicsFinanceLaw and economicsLawArtClassics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Casa di San Giorgio, funded in 1407, managed the debts of the Commune of Genoa and was composed of all the Genoese creditors of the Commune. Unlike other systems of debt utilized in republican cities with extensive territorial holdings (like Florence or Venice), or those of the European monarchies in the medieval and early modern eras, the Casa progressively acquired rights and powers that were originally the Commune’s prerogative. No other financial system developed such a degree of autonomy relative to the political power that managed debt. In Genoa, only the wealthiest male creditors participated in the management of the Casa di San Giorgio, while all male citizens could vote in the Commune. This is the most important difference between the governance of the two institutions. Over the fifteenth century, the Casa di San Giorgio acquired both the right to levy all the gabelle (taxes) in all the areas under the Commune’s control and the compere (the sets of credits) attached to them. Private contractors paid the Casa di San Giorgio in advance and at a discount for the right to collect taxes, managing the raising of gabelle. The revenue San Giorgio received served as the basis for payment of the debts that the Commune owed its creditors. Unlike other public systems of debt, the interest rate was not inversely proportional to the value of the title, but depended on the revenue obtained by the selling of gabelle. Shares of the Casa di San Giorgio, the loca, produced an interest, the pagae, which varied over time. Both the loca and the pagae were negotiable in the secondary market. From 1408 to 1444 and from 1530 until 1805, the Casa di San Giorgio performed activities of a main central bank. Genoese bankers and citizens had accounts with the Casa di San Giorgio. The bank offered both deposit and credit operations. From 1446 on, the Casa di San Giorgio progressively acquired from the Commune territories that it governed until 1562 with the fullest extent of territorial authority. These rights meant that it was the Casa di San Giorgio, rather than the Commune, that administered justice and governed the populations of these territories: Caffa on the Black Sea, Famagusta in Cyprus, Corsica, the Lunigiana (northern Tuscany), and communities within the Liguria (Ventimiglia, Pieve di Teco, Levanto).

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)0.000
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.004

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRenaissance and Reformation→Same topicHistorical Economic and Social Studies→French-language works237,207→