MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078630561 · doi:10.1086/ahr.114.4.1071

James B. Bell . A War of Religion: Dissenters, Anglicans, and the American Revolution.<i>(Studies in Modern History.)</i>New York : Palgrave Macmillan . 2008 . Pp. xxii, 323. $74.95.

2009· article· en· W2078630561 on OpenAlexaff
Nancy L. Rhoden

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Historical Review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsSpanish Civil WarHistoryNewspaperClassicsColonialismArgument (complex analysis)Religious studiesArt historyLawSociologyPhilosophyMedia studiesPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the tradition of J. C. D. Clark's The Language of Liberty, 1660–1832: Political Discourse and Social Dynamics in the Anglo-American World (1994), which proclaimed the American Revolution a war of religion, James B. Bell examines the situation of the colonial English Church from 1686 to 1783. He builds on his earlier book The Imperial Origins of the King's Church in Early America, 1607–1783 (2004), which only briefly examined two major themes of this newer work: the controversy over the possibility of a colonial bishop, and the political orientation of the church's ministers. The book's main contribution lies in his examination of Dissenter-Anglican conflict in New England, particularly Massachusetts, throughout the century before 1776. Bell's second declared contribution (p. xi) consists of his claim that radical politicians John Adams, Samuel Adams, and John Wilkes, through their authorship of several newspaper articles in Boston and London, transformed an ecclesiastical argument into a political and civil one. In part two, Bell considers the political sentiments of the clergymen in a series of chapters prominently featuring biographical sketches.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.443
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Historical ReviewSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207