Bibliographic record
Abstract
The papers of Bartholomew O'Brien, innkeeper and broker of silver, offer a fresh look at Montreal's Irish Catholic community in the 1840s. His interventions illustrate the way an individual navigated an "ethnicized" social network and circulated resources between the market economy and the gift economy, spheres that Ferdinand Tönnies termed the Gesellschaft and the Gemeinschaft (1887). In a city embarked on the revolution of steam power, the two circuits were braided together, and, despite the obsolescence of Tönnies' original formulation, the distinction reveals some persistent features of the invasive nature of capital and human responses to its perennial re-structuring of the urban economy. When the market faltered, each of the several ethnic communities worked to buffer its members through a personal web of trust. The evidence is based on archival sources: O'Brien's own correspondence and daybook, parish registers, and leases and loans conserved in notaries' repertories. Les papiers de Bartholomew O'Brien, aubergiste et changeur d'argent, offrent une nouvelle perspective sur la communauté irlando-catholique de Montréal. Membre de la génération pionnière, ses interventions au cours des années 1840 font comprendre comment l'individu naviguait dans un réseau social «ethnicisé» pour faire circuler des ressources entre l'économie du marché et l'économie du don, les deux sphères que Ferdinand Tönnies nommait Gesellschaft et Gemeinschaft (1887). Dans une ville qui amorçait une révolution industrielle, les deux circuits s'entrecroisaient. Bient qu'elle soit dépassée, la distinction de Tönnies découvre la nature envahissante du capital et la réponse humaine à la restructuration de l'économie urbaine. Lors d'une défaillance du marché, chaque communauté culturelle s'acharnait à protéger les siens en mobilisant son propre réseau de confiance. L'interprétation est fondée sur des sources archivistiques: un journal de bord tenu par O'Brien, une correspondance et comptabilité, et baux et prêts conservés dans les répertoires des notaires.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".