MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007263683 · doi:10.7202/012459ar

“The Standard of Revolt”: Revolution and National Independence in Moore’s Lalla Rookh

2006· article· en· W2007263683 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeffery Vail

Bibliographic record

VenueRomanticism on the Net · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIrish and British Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsIrishIndependence (probability theory)RomanceWitnessHistoryNarrativeLiteratureResistance (ecology)AllegoryLawArtPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article argues that Thomas Moore's collection of narrative poems Lalla Rookh, an Oriental Romance (1817), by presenting disguised versions of the French Revolution and the Irish Rebellion of 1798, condemns the former but justifies the latter. As the “National Poet” and preeminent literary voice of Ireland, as well as a witness of the 1798 Rebellion, Moore was particularly concerned with the subjects of national independence and armed revolution. The Veiled Prophet of Khorassan depicts a monstrous embodiment of French Jacobinism in the form of the eighth-century false prophet Mokanna, who hides his horrific face behind a beautiful veil. In contrast to Mokanna's corrupt and evil revolution, the national uprising depicted in The Fire-worshippers is depicted as noble and justified. Moore intended this story of Persian resistance to Arab Muslim colonizers as an allegory of Irish Catholic resistance to England, with special reference to the 1798 Rebellion. The prose linking narrative of Lalla Rookh also contains a political dimension, looking forward to possible political reforms that would make armed struggle unnecessary.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRomanticism on the NetSame topicIrish and British StudiesFrench-language works237,207