Anne M. Martínez.<i>Catholic Borderlands: Mapping Catholicism onto American Empire, 1905–1935</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Catholic Borderlands: Mapping Catholicism onto American Empire, 1905–1935, Anne M. Martínez focuses on the period when the U.S. extended its influence, often but not always by direct annexation, over parts of the world that had once been part of the Spanish Empire. At the time, the dominant cultural narrative justifying this expansionism suggested that the U.S. had embraced modernity by virtue of its Protestant foundations and was now in the process of bringing modernity to the rest of the world. Martínez’s core argument is that during this period some American Catholic leaders promoted a counter-narrative designed to make American Catholics full partners in this empire-building project. The Catholic counter-narrative sought to reverse the Black Legend. Catholics argued that in areas such as the western and southwestern U.S., Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Mexico, all of which constitute the “borderlands” in Martínez’s title, Spanish missionaries centuries earlier had effectively begun the process of introducing Catholicism and their tenets of civilization to the indigenous inhabitants. This counter-narrative, however, went on to suggest that the Catholics living in these borderlands were now at risk of being lost to the church as a result of aggressive Protestant proselytizing and/or (and more likely) anti-religious sentiment in these areas. In this context (and this is part of the counter-narrative), American Catholics had an obligation to provide the resources that would allow the church to build upon the work of the Spanish missionaries and complete the civilizing process.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".