"Something More Durable. . .": The British Military’s Building of Wellington Barracks and Brick Construction in 19th-Century Halifax
Bibliographic record
Abstract
FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY AFTER ITS FOUNDING in 1749, Halifax was built mostly of wood. Some brick and stone buildings were constructed over the years, especially along the waterfront. Most of these were stone, as were a few prominent public buildings, such as the lieutenant-governor's residence (completed in 1808), the legislature (completed in 1819), and St. Mary's Cathedral (completed in 1827).1 The majority of the city's buildings, however, were constructed of relatively cheap, plentifully available wood and covered with wooden shingles. Crowded along the downtown streets, these buildings were subject deterioration due the weather and liable destruction by fire, though Halifax escaped the sweeping conflagrations that devasted Quebec, Saint John and St. John's.2 Building construction changed in the second half of the 19th century as the city expanded and the economic base diversified following a period of unprecedented prosperity in the 1850s and 1860s. Expansion required more and larger buildings and, as Susan Buggey has noted, growing civic pride and social conscience resulted in efforts to upgrade the quality of the urban fabric.3 A series of devastating fires in the downtown between 1857 and 1861 was, perhaps, of most immediate impact. This impelled civic authorities pass stringent new fire regulations requiring builders use fire-resistant materials such as cast iron, stone and brick. The latter proved the most popular.4 Bricks became increasingly common as a building material in mid19th-century North America; Halifax, as well as Nova Scotia generally, was about join the mainstream. First, though, it needed an adequate supply of brick at reasonable prices.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".