MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158340722 · doi:10.21083/irss.v26i0.221

R. Eagles, <i>Francophilia in English Society, 1748-1815</i>

2007· article· en· W2158340722 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeffrey D. Burson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Scottish Studies · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ecent historiography has dealt more frequently with the role of France in the identity formation of Modern Britain.Norman Hampson, for example, focuses on the early 1790s as pivotal to French and English identity formations in The Perfidity of Albion.In 1789, the French idealized English institutions, but became disillusioned over equivocal English support in the Revolution.Hampson argues that this was mirrored by English disgust over the trajectory of the Revolution. 1 Eagles continues the debate on English national identities, but her Francophilia in English Society employs a broader scope.The work spans the period from the end of the War of Austrian Succession in 1748, occasionally dipping toward 1688, and forward toward the Bourbon Restoration in France.Chiefly, Eagles' book is a highly successful attempt to counter the dominant focus, the development of English identity, merely in reaction to France.For Eagles, "No … fixed concepts [either of "Britishness" or "Englishness"] existed in the eighteenth century, and aristocratic Francophilia, and cosmopolitanism were … dominant in the years leading up to the French Revolution."National identity in reaction to France, Eagles cautions, was a trend of the late 1700s among the Protestant, commercial "middling sorts," as Gerald Newman also argues. 2 Yet, Eagles shows that France remained central to English society, especially for the aristocracy, and later in the century, for Newman's middling sorts also. 3 Eagles' is a thematic approach, dealing first with satirical

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.257 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review of Scottish StudiesSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207