<i>The Transformation of the World: A Global History of the Nineteenth Century</i>, by Jürgen Osterhammel
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Transformation of the World: A Global History of the Nineteenth Century, by Jurgen Osterhammel. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2014. xxii, 1,167 PP- $39-95 US (cloth). Reviewing major book at time when it has been already reviewed by many historians, economists, and commentators on social and political affairs (its first German edition was published in 2009) is always challenge and forlorn task: one should avoid repeating what has been written, but it almost does not matter what one writes because many readers may not want to see yet another review and, in any case, the prevailing opinion has been already formed. Just for the benefit of those who have somehow missed the appearance of 1,100+ page book: reviewers' praise of Osterhammel's transformation has included adjectives ranging from intimidating and panoramic to astonishing, magisterial and heroic, and it was judged to be both milestone and benchmark, and nothing less than Braudel-worthy narrative of the nineteenth century. I agree with the minority of reviewers who found Osterhammel's work praiseworthy, real contribution to the understanding of one of the most remarkable periods of history--and yet somehow missing its mark. After I read the book I discovered that Samuel Moyn, in The Prospect, already wrote what I wanted to say: disappointing as (Moyn, July 2014 http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/arts-and-books/book-review-the-transformation-of-the-world-by-jurgen-osterhammel). And here, as reviewer, I think I can make contribution by focusing on what I believe is the book's key missing (or, more accurately, inexplicably underdeveloped) aspect: its inadequate recounting of the century's critical technical advances and curiously incomplete appraisal of their impacts. I say this not because of any hyper-critical attitude due to my previous (and continuing) involvement in this fascinating topic (a decade ago I published Creating the Twentieth Century: Technical Innovations of 1867-1914) but simply because no other century (the twentieth included) brought so many fundamental technical and scientific departures and because Osterhammel, while obviously well aware of the unprecedented role that these advances played in the global transformation, chose to treat them in an inexplicably selective and perfunctory manner as just one of many parts of his narrative. He rightly notes that the second industrial revolution is better understood as second economic revolution, he recognizes energy as a leitmotif of the whole (p. 652) he pays enough attention to coal and steam engines, notes the energy gulf that separated have and have-not nations at the end of the nineteenth century and his chapter on networks (railroads, steamships, cabling the world, telegraphy, standardization, gold, capital, debt) is excellent. But the emergence of mass-scale iron and steel production, the quintessential materials of the century, receives only fragmentary and disjointed attention: Henry Bessemer or William Kelly are never mentioned, nor is there anything about blast and open hearth furnaces without whose output the new world of railroads and steamships could not arise (in contrast, there is great deal on much less consequential plantation agriculture). Even more remarkably for book by German author, there is nothing about the German invention of the automobile and the names of Karl Benz, Gottlieb Daimler and Wilhelm Maybach, its indisputable creators, never appear. Nor is there briefest recognition of other Germans whose inventions and innovations had truly epochal impact: Friedrich Woehler (organic chemistry), Carl Linde (refrigeration) and, above all, Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch without whose invention of ammonia synthesis the world could not support more than seven billion people (their work was done between 1906-1913, within Osterhammel's long, 1780-1914, nineteenth century). …
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it