MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986405695 · doi:10.1353/rah.2014.0100

What to Make of the War of 1812?

2014· article· en· W1986405695 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter J. Kastor

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in American History · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpanish Civil WarHistoryVictoryLawClassicsEconomic historyPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What to Make of the War of 1812? Peter J. Kastor (bio) Paul A. Gilje. Free Trade and Sailors’ Rights in the War of 1812. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013. ix + 425 pp.. Illustrations, notes, and index. $29.99. Donald R. Hickey, ed. The War of 1812: Writings from America’s Second War of Independence. New York: The Library of America, 2013. xxi + 892 pp. Maps, chronology, biographical notes, note on the texts, notes, and index. $29.37. Gene Allen Smith. The Slaves’ Gamble: Choosing Sides in the War of 1812. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. ix + 257 pp. Illustrations, maps, notes, and index. $27.00. We recently marked the bicentennial of the War of 1812. You can be forgiven if you didn’t notice. Intensely unpopular in its own time, the War of 1812 hasn’t gained much traction in the public imagination among Americans today. And who can blame them? The War of 1812 may have produced the national anthem, but it also included the burning of Washington. The only major battlefield victory for the Americans—at New Orleans in January 1815—actually occurred after negotiators had signed a peace treaty ending the war. Yet the War of 1812 marked the first time the United States actually declared war, theoretically an important moment in any nation’s history. The bicentennial of the conflict therefore offers a revealing moment to mull over the shifting fortunes of military history. One of the principal concerns of historical writing for centuries, military history actually remains one of the most popular subgenres of mainstream American nonfiction; but it has fallen on hard times among academic historians. Not that war, conflict, and military institutions aren’t the stuff of historical inquiry—especially when it comes to the American Revolution, the Civil War, and much of the twentieth century. Yet scholars remain cautious. The reasons are simple. Military history often appears to be the preserve of the enthusiast rather than the scholar, given to celebration rather than critical analysis; at its worst it appears to support militarism rather than question its outcomes. These circumstances are particularly true for early America. Over twenty years after the “New Military History” [End Page 644] proclaimed the value of studying military institutions and military conflict, few historians have followed suit when it comes to early America.1 For Paul A. Gilje, Donald R. Hickey, and Gene Allen Smith, exploring the War of 1812 includes a careful effort to navigate clear of the scholarly pitfalls of military history. Hickey has produced a single-volume documentary edition that seeks to chronicle the war in the broadest terms possible. Gilje situates the War of 1812 within a much longer struggle over the rules of maritime commerce and the social status of mariners. Smith examines warfare as a force that held the potential to transform racial hierarchies, but more often preserved them. Understanding these books begins by triangulating them within three complementary yet very different historiographical traditions surrounding the War of 1812. Long before he edited the Library of America edition on the War of 1812, Hickey had established himself as the leading historian on the military history of the conflict.2 J. C. A. Stagg’s work remains the most revealing consideration of the diplomatic disputes that precipitated the war and the political context that surrounded it.3 More recently, Alan Taylor’s study of the war on the U.S.–Canadian borderlands reflects the broader shift in American history away from the time-honored attention to political and military narrative and toward a focus on political culture, social history, and Indian history.4 As a result, the recent books by Gilje, Hickey, and Smith all operate within the overlapping concerns of Stagg, Taylor, and Hickey himself. They veer closest to Taylor’s approach, concerning themselves with the social, cultural, and racial dimensions of military conflict rather than elite decision making or battlefield tactics. Yet all three books are fundamentally dependent on those political and military histories. The authors recount similar general narratives of the war. The War of 1812 was very much the Americans’ fault, but it came in response to British actions. In the decades following American independence, the...

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in American HistorySame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207