Britishness, Canadianness, Class, and Race: Winnipeg and the British World, 1880s-1910s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently historians of the British Empire have argued that in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries a large number of European-descended Canadians understood themselves as part of a "British world," a transnational community of men and women whose members shared a common set of values and institutions whether they were located in Winnipeg, Sydney, Auckland, or Cape Town. These scholars argue thinking about Canada as a part of this British world is important because it recognizes that they self-consciously acted as part of a broader geopolitics, and because it provides a corrective to imperial historians’ tendency over the past several decades to overemphasize subjection, exploitation, and coercion. Placing the history of Canada (and also New Zealand and Australia) at the centre of the story, they suggest, shows that a broad allegiance to the British Crown was the glue that held the empire together. This article critically assesses the British world strategy for bringing the empire back into Canadian history, and for bringing Canada back into imperial history, by considering British identity in Winnipeg, Manitoba. It argues that while British world scholars have identified vitally important, and under-appreciated and understudied aspects of Canadian history, they have also understated the extent to which exploitation, subjugation, and coercion were central to identity and identity formation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".