Anglicanism and Its Discontents: Protestant Diversity and Disestablishment in British America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
About fifteen years after embarking in April 1759 on a one-and-a-half-year tour of North America's “middle settlements,” the Anglican minister Andrew Burnaby published an account of his travels. By 1775, political unrest in North America had led the English to wonder if their North American colonies would claim independence, and Burnaby's book attempted to ease anxieties. In his account, Burnaby insisted that his time spent traveling between Virginia and New Hampshire had shown him that England's colonies could not cohere independently of Britain. They simply were too diverse. Noting that the colonies “are composed of people of different nations, different manners, different religions, and different languages,” Burnaby pointed out that “religious zeal too, like a smothered fire, is secretly burning in the hearts of the different sectaries that inhabit them.” Burnaby was largely right. The peoples of British North America were diverse, and religious differences provided flash points of discord. Immigration to England's colonies had exploded in the decades preceding Burnaby's visit, with large waves of immigrants coming from Scotland, Ireland, and Germany. As Burnaby indicated, “different nations” and “different manners” brought with them “different religions,” which almost invariably were strains of Protestantism. With different Protestant loyalties serving as ciphers for other forms of difference, Protestant identities were more distinct and more discordant in eighteenth-century North America than at any time before or after.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".