A Companion to Medieval and Renaissance Bologna
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the introduction to this volume, Sarah Rubin Blanshei writes that its goal is "to show the distinctive and multifaceted character of Bologna's medieval and Renaissance greatness as well as its weaknesses and limitations, and to explicate the transformations Bologna underwent as it developed from a medieval commune [] to a major industrial city and cultural crossroads of the Renaissance" (1).Indeed, the six-hundred-page book offers a detailed course in the current scholarly consensus regarding the second city of the Papal States.Blanshei has coordinated a useful and monumental volume of contributions predominantly by Italian scholars translated into English.(Blanshei and fellow translator Theresa Federici are to be congratulated on their relatively smooth prose.)Anyone wishing to begin work on a project related to the political, cultural, religious, artistic, or literary history of the city should read this book, as it reveals the lay of the land as it is currently known.After the introduction, the volume begins with an overview of extant archival sources provided by Diana Tura of the Archivio di Stato di Bologna.This chapter frames the discussions that follow and alerts the reader to the wealth of documents, many unexplored, that remain preserved in Bologna's archives and libraries.In doing so, Tura signals the start of a clear campaign to encourage more work on the city's history.Tura's archival discussion is augmented by Rosa Smurra's chapter, which explores extant fiscal sources, and in particular the Estimi.This was a system of direct taxation that was used in urban Bologna from 1235 until the late fourteenth century and in the Bolognese contado until the late eighteenth century.While Smurra's discussion concentrates on thirteenth-and fourteenth-century estimi, this chapter lays the financial groundwork for understanding later chapters that tie political changes and social power to the accumulation of wealth.Massimo Giansante's chapter follows this path, revealing how Bolognese bankers supported the thriving studium, collaborated with foreign banks, and used their clout to gain greater political authority.The Pepoli, Beccadelli, and Bianchi di Cosa all play important roles in this chapter, which concludes with a discussion of how Jewish bankers, the issue of usury, and the Monte di Piet impacted early modern Bologna.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".