MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3196235724 · doi:10.5287/ora-2rr1g7dp0

From empire to empire: The collapse of British America and the rise of imperial republicanism, 1773-1812

2020· dissertation· en· W3196235724 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Trent DeWolf Taylor

Notice bibliographique

RevueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) · 2020
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEmpireAncient historyBritish EmpireHistoryEconomic history

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This project examines the idea of an American republican empire from the eve of the Revolution through the Louisiana Purchase. It is built predominantly around the actions of Congress, from its beginnings as an interprovincial summit of British colonies pushing for imperial reform to the federal legislature of an independent nation with oversight of the Republic’s territorial dependencies. Much of it also focusses on the language of empire; descriptions of the Republic as community of polities united under one head and the embrace of the terms ‘colony’ and ‘colonial’ to describe the relationship between the federal government and territorial dependencies. While many historians have written on Thomas Jefferson’s ‘Empire of Liberty’, my aim is to show that the conception of the United States as an empire goes well beyond Jefferson. The title, From Empire to Empire, alludes to the fact that the notion of a US empire has its roots in America’s membership in the British Empire and was built largely on British precedent but with republican innovation. The dissertation is divided into three sections: the first looking at empire and the Revolution; the second at empire in the Early Republic; and the third at empire and the Louisiana Purchase. I reinterpret the Revolution within a greater British Atlantic frame. Often historians of the Revolution restrict their study to the thirteen colonies which become the United States, but Continental Congress sent invitations to and envisioned delegates from throughout the British Empire from the Kingdom of Ireland to Barbados. Congress’s original goal was ‘to preserve the freedom and happiness of the whole British empire’. Given that, as David Armitage has shown, the colonists were the first to conceive of the British Empire as an inclusive community linked by a common sovereign, political rights, religion, and identity it should not be surprising that Congress invoked Britishness and the Empire in its petitions, addresses, and debates. The first section looks at Congress as an imperial body. Using the changing American relationships with Ireland, Bermuda, and Québec between 1774 and 1783, it traces Congress’s development from a British interprovincial conference to an imperialising force of its own intent on annexing and absorbing many of Britain’s remaining New World colonies. Although the United States failed to annex other British colonies during the War, the southern portion of Québec was ceded to the fledgling republic by the Treaty of Paris. The second section looks at congressional plans on how to govern this region, ultimately resulting in the Northwest Ordinance. Empire and colonialism permeate the Northwest Ordinance. The Ordinance closely followed the form of a British colonial charter; it established the relationship between imperial centre and colonial periphery; outlined the authority of the territorial government, asserted the supremacy of Congress and even emulated the Crown’s claim to a fifth of precious metals in seventeenth-century charters. The American ideology of republican empire was an outgrowth of an earlier British imperial identity. The Northwest Ordinance ultimately created the American territorial system and established what I argue is a two-tiered system of empire: the Union of States (a federal empire of equals) and the subordinate dependent territories. The final section of this dissertation deals with the Louisiana Purchase and the statutes and policies surrounding the governance of the Orleans Territory. The Purchase has sometimes been seen as a break with the political tradition of the Founding. Legal scholar George Dargo, for example, characterised the US as becoming ‘a colonial power within a generation of its own anti-colonialist revolution’ because of the way the federal government governed the purchased lands. This thesis holds that the acquisition and governance of Orleans is better understood as a continuation of the ideas of empire permeating American political ideology and discourse since the Revolution. The Louisiana Purchase thus represents the affirmation of American imperial republican ideology rather than a shift towards a new system. Overall, this dissertation challenges the notion that the Revolution was overtly anti-imperial and anti-colonial, instead arguing that empire had a great deal of political currency with American Patriot-Whigs going into 1776. With independence, the US sought to be an empire in Britain’s mould but purged of corruption and reformed to suit a republic. Imperial republicanism had colonial dependencies but guaranteed their eventual statehood. Furthermore, the imperial mindset of the Early Republic is not a Manifest Destiny-esque ideology, but one heavily orientated towards the Atlantic and one which continued past the admission of Orleans to the Union as the State of Louisiana in 1812.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut 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: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,543
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,920

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0090,006
Communication savante0,0050,002
Science ouverte0,0000,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

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 Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,286
Écart entre enseignants0,265 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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
GenreAutre

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
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford)Même sujetAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsTravaux en français237 207