MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2036157455 · doi:10.2307/3125019

A Fatal Friendship: Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr

2000· article· en· W2036157455 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
James A. Lewis, Arnold A. Rogow, Roger G. Kennedy

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the Early Republic · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFriendshipPhilosophySociologyLawArtHistoryClassicsPolitical scienceSocial science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A Fatal Friendship: Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr. By Arnold A. Rogow. (New York: Hill and Wang, 1998. Pp. xvi, 351. Cloth, $27.50; paper, $14.00.) Burr, Hamilton, and Jefferson: A Study in Character. By Roger G. Kennedy. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Pp. xix, 476. Illustrations, map. Cloth, $30.00; paper, $18.95.) As scholars speed away to explore the latest topics and employ the most fashionable of methodologies in American history, some of the oldest issues in our past remain popular and find a ready audience. Perhaps no subject has weathered the ebb and flow of academic fashion as has interest in our founding fathers. For much of the audience, of course, this has been nothing more than a national version of doing a family genealogy. Who gets credit for what? Who really wrote which document? Who was most influential at key moments in our past? However, there also has been interest in more universal, profound questions such as the measure of a man. What were these individuals really like? Demigods? Villains? Family men? Democrats? Racists? Misogynists? To a great extent, these are the topics of the two books being reviewed here. While both of these works explore old topics, both are clearly revisionist in their approach. In spite of their titles, they are really efforts to revive the reputation of Aaron Burr and to question traditional judgements about Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, and other worthies of the day. All of these revisions have been around for some time, but they have not been explored as carefully or systemically as in these books. This new Burr is a curious and much more interesting character than the old blackguard popularly condemned for murdering Hamilton and committing treason by planning to divide the union in the West. Both Arnold A. Rogow and Roger G. Kennedy find Burr's childhood critical in understanding the man at Weehawken (site of the famous duel with Hamilton) and Richmond (location of Burr's last trial for treason). Position, power, and influence came easily to Burr, for he belonged to the distinguished Edwards family. His grandfather was none other than Jonathan Edwards of Great Awakening fame. He enjoyed all the benefits that a distinguished lineage granted in eighteenth-century America. Few doors were ever closed to Burr. Since his father and mother died early, he and his sister, Sally, were raised by an assortment of family members. Rogow finds it very significant that Burr was admitted without question to Princeton while poor Hamilton had to settle for Columbia. Ivy League admissions were apparently a factor in elite life even then! It was a war-actually the war: the Revolutionary War-that headed Burr towards Weehawken and Richmond. He saw combat early in the conflict, being wounded at Quebec, and distinguished himself on the battlefield at several other points. Jefferson, of course, found many reasons not to serve in the military, and Hamilton remained safely behind the lines as a staff officer tied to Washington. This last founding father-perhaps the founding father-deeply influenced Burr and his career. Feeling himself the social equal of Washington, Burr saw the commanding general at his worst-first in the retreat from New York in 1776 and then at places like Valley Forge-and was not impressed. With a soldier's dislike for incompetent commanders and staff officers who never suffer the consequences of mistaken orders, Burr never found himself included in Washington's orbit-understandable but a political hurdle after Washington became president in 1789. To oppose Washington, and ultimately his party, put Burr in the same circle as Thomas Jefferson, a most uneasy alliance of men who had little respect for each other. Rogow and Kennedy devote considerable attention to women in their stories-and rightly so. Rogow explores the painful ties between Hamilton and his mother, Rachael, while Kennedy spends a little time on Jefferson and Sally Hemings. …

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,957
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,925

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,016
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,255 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2000
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the Early RepublicMême sujetAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsTravaux en français237 207