An Index to the Slavery and Slave Trade Enquiry: The British Parliamentary House of Commons Sessional Papers, 1788-1792
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The article describes volumes pertaining to slavery and the slave trade in the British Parliament House of Commons Sessional Papers of the eighteenth century, published by Sheila Lambert in 1975 but seldom used by historians of Africa and the trans-Atlantic slave trade. In addition, the article provides an index for the eight volumes from 1788 to 1792 that concern the slave trade. The index is arranged according to the names of individuals who provided testimony to the House of Commons or who are referred to in the testimonies, as well as according to places in Africa and the Americas that are mentioned in the testimonies. There is also a list of tables that are included in the texts and a list of ships mentioned in the testimonies, which are referenced with respect to the ships inVoyages: The Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade Database. The materials were assembled in connection with the campaign to abolish the British slave trade, which was eventually achieved in 1807. As is clear from the testimonies and statistical information, the enquiry into the slave trade is a valuable source of documentary material that is relevant to scholars studying the coastal regions of Atlantic Africa in the eighteenth century and the trans-Atlantic slave trade during the period when the British trade was at its height.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.078 | 0.021 |
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".