The ecclesiastical response in Britain to World War I: A study of the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, and the Roman Catholic Church
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is a commonplace in cultural studies that World War I was a watershed event that ushered in the twentieth century. Scholars generally agree that it is an oversimplification to say that the war caused the social, political, and cultural changes in Britain that were the hallmarks of the last century. Instead, a more nuanced understanding looks to the impact that the war had on pre-existing cultural trends, and the degree to which these developments became societal norms as a result of the war. Since the war ended in November 1918, historians have written voluminously about its impact on Great Britain, the focus of their narratives changing with contemporary trends in historiography. The studies have covered nearly every conceivable subject: from political and diplomatic explanations of the conflict to Marxist analysis of class tensions; from detailed accounts of individual battles to studies of changing gender constructs. In spite of the rich diversity of this existing scholarship, there is surprisingly little published research regarding religion in Britain during the war. To be sure, there are publications about army and navy chaplains during the conflict, and a very limited number of works on individual denominations. However, there is no study that broadly examines ecclesiastical responses to the war, or the war's impact on British religious institutions. This is, of course, an extraordinary oversight considering the important role that religion had in individual lives and its considerable impact on the social and political fabric of the nation. In a parallel omission, most church histories encompassing the war years are curiously reticent in discussing the impact of the event. These studies, both "general" and "institutional," look at broader trends over several decades...
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".