MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325184056 · doi:10.1093/ahr/119.3.973

C. A. Hagerman. Britain's Imperial Muse: The Classics, Imperialism, and the Indian Empire, 1784–1914.

2014· article· en· W2325184056 on OpenAlexaff
Bhavani Raman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Historical Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtueSublimeEmpireSubject (documents)ClassicsMosaicVisionCivilizationPoetryEclecticismHistoryArt historyArtLiteratureSociologyAncient historyPhilosophyAnthropologyArchaeologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Perhaps the most compelling image in this book appears in its conclusion. In 1803, a Roman mosaic of Bacchus/Dionysus riding a tiger was uncovered while construction work was being done on the East India Company's premises on Leadenhall Street in London. The discovery was fitting, for the mosaic referenced the Dionysian conquest of the East. Its surviving pieces were restored to a high polish and transferred many years later to the British Museum. C. A. Hagerman's study of the imperial affection for the classics similarly takes on the appearance of this restored mosaic. He treats classical discourse as an assemblage that shaped imperial perceptions, conduct, virtue, and vision. In turn, British imperial interpretations shaped classical discourse in light of the present. Like the Roman mosaic, classical discourse appears as a medium and open to multiple readings. While other scholars have critiqued the notion of the Indian sublime in European intellectual traditions, the history of ideas that Hagerman presents is different. This book contributes to the burgeoning literature at the intersection of classical reception studies and British imperial history by analyzing how a divinely sanctioned Roman dominium animated British imperial visions. It mines poems, private libraries, scholarly tomes, popular literature, examination questions, personal correspondence, and memorandums written in English in both India and Britain. Nine full chapters deal with the various ways in which imperial discourse drew on the classics for ideas about the civilizing mission, imperial virtue, subject peoples, and imperial decline. Far from an irrelevant subject of rote learning, the classics appear in each chapter as crucial to imperial subjectivity. Britain's elites, as Hagerman notes, learned to love the classics as schoolboys, gleaning from them a shared code of conduct that would prove indispensable for public life. Even if a muscular Christianity permeated the upper classes in the nineteenth century, elite models of rule held that public men ought to orate like Cicero and rule with a firm hand like Roman heroes—and a steady diet of classical histories of conquest fed the imperial appetite. As the chapter on Roman imperial perfection suggests, republican ideals of martial and civic virtues may well have been pushed aside by Victorian Hellenism, but the fascination with Rome's martial history remained. Even that most modern idea of Victorian progress was not left untouched by the classics.

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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0050.003
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Historical ReviewSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207