“Shelburnian Manners”: Gentility and the Loyalists of Shelburne, Nova Scotia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Loyalist refugees who made their way to Shelburne, Nova Scotia, in the aftermath of the American Revolution have been denigrated in various accounts as Loyalist “layabouts” and “dancing beggars” who spent too much of their time and capital on genteel sociability and conspicuous consumption. The writings of three of the sharpest critics of Shelburne—the Scottish merchant James Fraser, the Loyalist surveyor Benjamin Marston, and British Royal Engineer William Booth—often appear in modern academic works without sufficient contextualization. This paper asserts that the commentaries of Fraser, Marston, and Booth are not merely critiques of Shelburne per se, but part of a larger trans-Atlantic debate about the dilution and democratization of gentility. Indeed, the uprooted populations that made their way to Shelburne took advantage of the fluidity of the pioneer settlement to negotiate a form of middling gentility that acted as a vehicle of social mobility and identity reformation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".