Research edition 0.14 / 5 November 2026

The verification log.

Research decisions are part of the exhibition’s evidence.

1. The Cookbook in Public, edition0.14,5 November2026. Four interactive social settings added to both independent websites. Washington history pp.677–678 supplies reported canvassing, club food discussions and fair booths. Eaton’s original convention expense attachment,p.3,item14747,records dinner expense$200,ticket receipts$168 and net cost$32. No attendance,menu,conversion rate or link to a specific recipe inferred. Modern schematic drawings are labelled.35 sources/32 claims. Explore the new scenes.
2. Original Eaton accounts,edition 0.13,5 November 2026. Located the digitised WSL MS 171,Box 2 reports in the DeVoe collection:16 June 1909,item 14744; non-final30 November 1910,items14797–14798; update10 January 1911,items14745–14749. All specified page images checked. January p.4 lists a 3,000-book batch costing$1,351.01, sales receipts $1,017.70 and a $333.31 deficit covered by special donations. This corrects the earlier secondary-lead presentation of1,351 copies sold and a remaining shortfall. The 1922 count of 3,000 sold remains unverified. November cost totals differ between sheets and are preserved,not silently reconciled.35 references/28 claims. Original accounts and reading.
3. Fundraising research 0.12,5 November 2026. Located reported Boston event results in the 1902 movement history:1886 cleared $6,000 (p.704),1887 nearly $8,000 gross (p.705),1890 Country Store $2,346 gross (p.707). These do not isolate Burr cookbook revenue. The 1922 Washington chapter’s3,000 published-and-sold assertion (p.677) differs from Williams 2017’s accessible p.91 excerpt citing Eaton 1910:1,351 sold and $333.31 shortfall. Only the excerpt was accessible; the latter figures remain a research lead, excluded from verified totals. No ledger reconciliation or original financial account obtained.32 sources/26 claims. Results · Discrepancy.
4. Research expansion 0.11, 5 November 2026. Replaced the suffrage chapter’s empty financial list with the p.viii political-print advertisement; added named publishing roles and a reception trail through Derleth. Read Webb’s 1912 fifth edition, pp.95 and212, for accounting responsibilities, subscriptions, grants and education. Checked Rowntree p.109 for fuel and sundries; added the Commons debate of14 April 1902. Cross-checked the four food-work averages in the official 1913 abstract and corrected the preserved-food seasonal reference. Resolved Beeton’s mould reference on p.797 in both projects. Audit now contains29 sources and23 claims. Original issues, branch accounts and cookbook net proceeds remain unverified. Findings and remaining gaps.
5. Presentation update, 5 November 2026. Applied the approved floating-catalogue theme to both main projects. The exhibition has eight chapter covers and a complete expandable directory; Recipe Cabinet’s folios retain its search, filters and researched reader. Added motion controls and responsive layouts. Historical data, citations and verification statuses are unchanged. Backups were made before the update.
6. First public edition 0.10, 2 November 2026. Added the Leonard–Hoar–Vest counter-reading and the complete static evidence audit. The cookbook comparison remains curatorial. Corrected E09’s stale status and the abbreviated Burr edition date. Added a no-JavaScript budget table and a static source register. 26 source records and 16 claims. Original archive volumes, text-only checks and financial outcomes remain explicitly open. Audit and limits; release record.
7. Food illustration update, 2 November 2026. Five AI-generated food studies added beside the three kitchen recipes and the yeast / Graham gems contributions. Images are contemporary interpretations, not reconstructions or additional historical evidence. Full prompts and filenames are included in food-illustration-prompts.json.
8. Contemporary illustration update, 2 November 2026. Added two AI-generated conceptual engravings to the homepage and kitchen / suffrage chapters. Captions, alternative text and the design notebook distinguish interpretation from archival evidence. Full prompts are bundled. Historical data and source statuses are unchanged.
9. Suffrage publishing, version 0.9. MSU’s scan is marked Second Edition and names both 1886 and 1890 events. Title, preface, contributor list and pp.5,11,131 were visually checked. The Iowa copy is catalogued 1890 and lacks pp.65–66; its searchable text was used for navigation only. Three public roles were read in the earlier AWSA publication’s LOC text PDF. Howe’s contribution is a statement, not a recipe. No sales total, financial transfer or political impact is claimed. Derleth’s introduction and cookbook discussion were reviewed as scholarship. Read the new American comparison.
10. Recorded household activity, version 0.8. Dorothy Wordsworth’s entry dated 25 November 1801, p.67 in Knight’s 1897 edition, and the editorial preface pp.vii–viii were read in Gutenberg transcription. No facsimile check, exact Beeton dish match or household financial conclusion is claimed. The first archive transcription and scholarly-edition leads were inaccessible; the published edited diary is the consulted source. Read the case and its limits.
11. Kitchen access, version 0.7. Equipment, heat, work, optional additions, printed prices and yields in recipes 1731, 1852 and 2004 were rechecked against the existing source scans. Three source pages are copied into this independent website. No household class, income, total labour time or fuel price is assigned. Margin uncertainty and the unresolved pie-mould cross-reference remain explicit. Open the kitchen inventory.
12. Food and paid work, version 0.6. A chapter independent of the archive enquiry now presents four food-manufacturing rows from J. J. Mallon in Hutchins (1915), Table C, p.225. The table, method (p.213) and age/full-time definition (p.215) were checked against page images. Data concern 1906, not the nineteenth century. Original Board of Trade returns remain unchecked. Percentage sums and historical-pence conversions were checked. Read the new chapter.
13. West Hull selected, version 0.5. The official U DHC catalogue identifies West Hull Guild minutes (U DHC/145, 1901–1906), management minutes (U DHC/3–4), accounts (U DHC/48) and a shorter letterbook (U DHC/30). Catalogue pages 3, 8 and 17 were visually checked; p.5 was checked as catalogue text. Historical volumes remain unread. Membership and contemporary rules are unconfirmed. The 1901–1904 case is a reading plan, not evidence of influence. Sunderland remains a comparison; gaps in our search do not establish absence of surviving records. Case selection, references and reading sequence.
14. 1877 institutional rules obtained. The title page records three adoption meetings in 1877. Rule 5a on p.6, rule 12 on p.9 and rule 65 on p.31 were visually checked. The source strengthens the later-period textual check of formal inclusion; it does not establish 1844 wording or participation. Specified initial payments sum to 2s 3d; the five-share obligation is separate from this initial deposit and fees. Read the qualified assessment.
15. New source debates, version 0.3. Holyoake p.45 is visually checked and compared with the Hull catalogue’s broad exclusion wording. The National Co-operative Archive guide p.1 supplies [1915] for On Reading Balance Sheets, whereas Hull supplies [1914]. The earlier single-catalogue description below is retained as research history, not resolution of the pamphlet’s date. Inspect the comparisons and limits.
16. Rowntree p.110: image checked. The Wellcome manifest b28063661 identifies canvas b28063661_0136.jp2 as printed p.110. All eleven table rows, surrounding definitions and the rent footnote were visually inspected. Ditto marks and shared rent brackets are expanded in the downloadable dataset. Values are stored as integer historical pence; all component sums match the printed totals.
17. An unsuitable Rowntree copy was excluded. Internet Archive item povertyastudyto00rowngoog is catalogued as a 1971 H. Fertig reprint. It was not used to verify the 1901 table. This does not imply the reprint’s text differs; it avoids substituting an unchecked edition.
18. Holyoake’s consulted printing corrected. The title page of historyofrochdal00holyuoft is dated 1900, not 1893. It identifies the tenth revised and enlarged edition and a third edition/printing designation. The project previously combined the 1893 edition date with this later scan. The bibliography now identifies the consulted printing explicitly.
19. Holyoake pp.47–48: image checked. The diagram paraphrases the author’s description of distribution, educational allocation and credits towards shares. It is not a reconstruction from original society accounts. The dates of the individual rules and their operation are still unverified.
20. Abbott: current reference confirmed. Hull History Centre’s official catalogue, p.32, lists U DCW/7/8, Mrs Abbott of Tunbridge Wells, On Reading Balance Sheets, with supplied date [1914]. The pamphlet itself remains unread. The older microform guide supplies a 12-page extent.
21. Webb: catalogue lead retained. The National Co-operative Archive’s guide, p.9, lists High Dividends: What They Mean, 1897. No readable text was obtained in this research pass. No position on dividends is attributed to Webb.
22. Francatelli: check remains open. The Gutenberg equipment table was rechecked as a transcription. The candidate Wellcome / Internet Archive item b28131149 has catalogue metadata for A Plain Cookery Book [1867?], but the inspected page-10 image and searchable scan concern different cookery content. It was excluded from facsimile verification; the cause of this catalogue/scan mismatch has not been established. E01 remains explicitly awaiting a matching facsimile.
23. Rights and distribution. Rowntree’s Wellcome item currently carries an In copyright / possibly protected notice. Source images downloaded for examination are kept in a separate research folder and are not bundled in the uploadable website or ZIP. The pilot supplies source links, transcribed factual data and original visual arrangements.

Research boundary: a scan check establishes that the transcription matches the inspected page. It does not establish that an author’s report was accurate, representative or causally explanatory.

Data with provenance · Back to the pilot