MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2886054606 · doi:10.17169/ghsj.2018.163

Contract Enforcement and Risk Reduction: The Luso-Brazilian Companies in the last Quarter of the Eighteenth Century

2017· article· en· W2886054606 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Felipe Souza Melo

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. Dokumentenserver · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnforcementHistoriographyPortugueseQuarter (Canadian coin)ColonialismOrder (exchange)EmpireEconomyCapital (architecture)BusinessEconomic historyHistoryPolitical scienceEconomicsLawFinanceAncient historyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent investigations into long-distance trade in the early modern period have highlighted several strategies which were used by traders to mitigate risk. This article attempts to contribute to this historiography by analyzing contractual clauses of mercantile companies registered in Lisbon notarial records between 1784 and 1807, comprising merchants residing both in Portugal and in Brazil. These contractual clauses reveal that companies were a form of trade organization in which the capital owners residing in Lisbon limited the scope of action of agents in Pernambuco, in the northeast of Brazil, in order to protect their investments. In addition, this study demonstrates that mercantile hierarchies existed between the marketplaces of Portugal and Brazil. Thus, I cast some doubts on the most recent investigations of the economic history of the Portuguese Empire that argue for a predominance of Brazilian merchants in the overseas investments. I assert that, at the end of the eighteenth century, merchants residing in Lisbon still financed and directed colonial trade with agents in Pernambuco. This analysis explores the reasons that led trade to assume such a framework.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversitätsbibliothek der FU Berlin Hochschulschriftenstelle u. DokumentenserverSame topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207