The Colonial and Imperial Conferences, 1887-1937
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The first Colonial Conference met in London in 1887. The Conference was an experiment in imperial and international political consultation and came after years of lobbying by the Imperial Federation League (IFL) and the broader imperial unity movement which sought to reform Britain’s relations with its self-governing settler colonies. For the first time, British leaders met representatives of these distant colonies in the same room. It was the beginning of an efficient political institution that regularly brought people together from across the globe and bridged political and personal differences. Between 1887 and 1937, there were fifteen Conferences; thirteen were held in London at the heart of the imperial metropolis and two in Ottawa hosted by Canadian Governments keen to seize the initiative. Initially the Conference were dubbed ‘Colonial’ but after the 1907 Conference they became ‘Imperial’ Conferences, just as the white settler colonies renamed themselves as ‘Dominions’. Typically lasting around five weeks, the Conferences were elaborate events which became as much social and cultural gatherings as political meetings. The Conferences were successful precisely because through this parallel social programme they became regular opportunities for British and Dominion elites to network and build relationships and trust. As experiences, the Conferences often shaped colonial delegates’ ideas about the British Empire. Over five decades, up to the eve of the Second World War in 1937, the Colonial and Imperial Conferences emerged as the central institution for managing the evolving imperial relationship. The British Government discovered that the Conference method enabled them to subtly control the agenda through weaponised hospitality, just as the Dominions discovered the strength of working together to protect their collective interests. These Conferences were crucial to the transition from Empire to Commonwealth. As it appeared, the British Commonwealth of Nations retained the Conferences as their governing body and its consensus approach to decision-making and rhetorical appeals to familial links and shared values.
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 | 0,000 | 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 | 0,002 | 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 ».