British North America in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries ed. by Stephen Foster (review)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Reviewed by: British North America in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries ed. by Stephen Foster John G. Reid British North America in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries Edited by Stephen Foster. Oxford History of the British Empire, Companion Series. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. That a volume in the Companion Series to the Oxford History of the British Empire (OHBE) should be devoted to British North America in the form that culminated in the American Revolution is counterintuitive. One of the main criticisms of the initial series of the OHBE, after all, was that insofar as the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century volumes dealt with North America they unduly privileged the colonies that ultimately rebelled.1 However, Stephen Foster as editor effectively stakes out a distinctive area of interest for the new companion volume on British North America in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, even though it too has a heavy emphasis on the colonies that came to form the United States (US). The essays in this volume address the two central questions as to “whether it made a difference to people living in North America in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries that they were subjects of an empire and… if so, whether it mattered that the empire in question was British” (7). In a robust historiographical discussion, Foster situates the book in relation both to earlier interpretive approaches to Imperial history—notably the “imperial school” headed at Yale by Charles McLean Andrews—and to more recent initiatives within the “Atlantic World” approach. The latter, when combined in Foster’s view with historians’ morally-based fear “of being in collusion with the ill deeds” associated in the founding of the United States with slavery and Indigenous dispossession, has produced “a cacophony.” Upon the resulting historiographical impasse, the book ventures “a flank attack… rather than a head on assault” but promises the reader a heightened sense of “the ‘colonialness’ of the colonies” (7). The previous efforts in this direction, despite the undoubted inroads of the Yale school, are presented as cautionary examples that show the difficulty of moving away from national history in a US context: “We have been here before” (3). There is plenty of quality in the ten essays that follow. Foster and Evan Haefali provide an “overview” that acknowledges the complexity of empire, and trenchantly addresses diverse issues such as “the anomaly of New England” (21), the role of the Iroquois and other Indigenous powers, the relationship between war and public finance, the spread of cultural anglicization, and the disputes over the nature of Britishness that influenced the way in which “the Empire collapsed in on itself” (63). Ken MacMillan’s excellent chapter on empire, sovereignty and the seventeenthcentury American colonies builds upon the author’s earlier work in insisting that the role of the crown, far from being weak and reactive, was consistently based on principles of imperial oversight “forged in the medieval and early modern composite monarchy headed by the English crown” (101). Haefali’s discussion of religious pluralism in what was to become the US, in the context of the failure of the Church of England to gain “hegemonic status” despite the impetus temporarily given to such ambitions by the Revolution of 1688-89, concludes with the intriguing and revealing observation that degrees of religious pluralism varied widely among and within colonies, and that there was a link with Revolution-era Loyalism: “Pluralism produced more Loyalism than religious unity did” (134). A further chapter on religion, by Jeremy Gregory, makes the point that religious “establishments” in a broad sense were regionally characteristic of the North American empire: the Church of England in areas of the South and Congregationalism in New England, with pluralism prevailing to a greater degree in the Middle Colonies. The prominence given to religious history in these chapters is welcome, although it is curious that Roman Catholicism in Quebec—part of British North America from 1763, and its religious character a factor in the revolutionary crisis—receives only a passing reference (132). Subsequent chapters address issues related to African and Indigenous North Americans, although in each case from specialized perspectives. Robert E. Desrochers, Jr., argues that “the advent of print capitalism fundamentally changed...
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».