Instituting nation and empire in the modern British world
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This dissertation explores the dilemmas British subjects faced in their efforts to universalize “British” institutions across a diverse multinational empire during the long nineteenth century. The United Kingdom’s four constituent nations of England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland, alongside its myriad overseas colonies, represented a political experiment predicated on the foundational fiction that national and imperial interests could be made to serve one another. “Instituting Nation and Empire” analyzes three characteristically British institutions contemporaries imagined would unite Britain’s global populace: universities, local parliaments, and the monarchy. For many, the expectation that these institutions should take on distinctly “national” characters – whether Irish, Welsh, Indian, Jamaican, or Australian – itself became a unifying British ideal. But reconstituting the frequently siloed histories of Four-Nations Britain and its empire reveals how these institutions also became sites of conflict and tension that exacerbated fault lines within and among the Four Nations, between the Four Nations and their empire, and between colonies. Fundamental questions about liberal governance, sovereignty, and identity loomed large over seemingly minute squabbles about who these representative institutions were for.This transnational, polycentric study demonstrates how the British state’s uneven response to these micro-dramas stoked enduring rivalries, worsened fundamental inequities, and established racialized governing systems across its realms. White settler Australians got their national university at Sydney in 1850, while Black West Africans’ campaign failed twenty years later. Racialized Irish and Indian populations were coerced into accepting universities which served imperial needs but did not reflect their distinct national characters. Similarly, the imperial parliament granted “responsible government” to white settlers in Canada, Australia, and South Africa, but outright suspended the constitution in majority-Black Jamaica to prevent representative government there. Meanwhile, British Liberals dismantled their own party – which had previously espoused the value of political inclusion – in an attempt to deny Catholic Ireland “home rule.” Even the post-“mutiny” effort to bind Britain and India together by formally adding “Empress of India” to Victoria’s titles disrupted global British racial hierarchies; the change prompted a delegation of Canadians, Australians, and South Africans to demand “the Dominions” also be added, ahead of non-white India in the formal ordering. Juxtaposing these disparate conflicts offers a dynamic history of white settler colonialism by showing how the British state institutionalized a preoccupation with social and racial hierarchy which ultimately divided national and imperial interests. It also provides a genealogy of Britain’s approach to decolonization in the twentieth century, including the unequivocal non-decolonization of its white Dominions.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,017 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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.
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».