MAX GRIVNO. Gleanings of Freedom: Free and Slave Labor along the Mason-Dixon Line, 1790-1860.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this insightful history of labor in northern Maryland before the Civil War, Max Grivno adds to a wave of studies that has found the line between slavery and freedom to be far more blurred than previously thought. Gleanings of Freedom shows the ragged, uneven advance of free labor in a borderland that was fully implicated in the global network of commodity exchange. The book concentrates on six rural, wheat-growing counties along the southern edge of the Mason-Dixon line that separated free Pennsylvania from slave Maryland. Despite conventional wisdom that free labor was better suited to grain crops, which required a more flexible labor force than did cotton and sugar, there was nothing inevitable about the demise of slavery in northern Maryland. Until the Panic of 1819 the institution was expanding because high returns on wheat attracted planters from the played-out tobacco lands of southern Maryland. The disruption of the panic combined with the southwestern cotton boom to reverse this pattern. The number of slaves fell from seventeen percent of the six-county population in 1810 to five percent in 1860 as farmers manumitted elderly slaves and sold prime hands south. Although the institution was in retreat, “masters and mistresses fought a stubborn rearguard to preserve slavery as long as they could” (p. 90).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.009 |
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".