MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W290004338

A Matter of Honour: The Life, Campaigns and Generalship of Isaac Brock/The Astonishing General: The Life and Legacy of Sir Isaac Brock

2012· article· en· W290004338 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Phillip Buckner

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Canadian Studies · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonourBattleVictoryHistorySpanish Civil WarClassicsAncient historyLawPolitical sciencePoliticsArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

History Jonathon Riley, A Matter of Honour: The Life, Campaigns and Generalship of Isaac Brock (London: Frontline Books, 2011), 352 pp. Paper. £19.99. ISBN 978-1-896941-65-3. Wesley B. Turner, The Astonishing General: The Life and Legacy of Sir Isaac Brock (Toronto: Dundurn Press, 2011), 376 pp. Cased. $35. ISBN 978-1-55488-777-4. As the bicentenary of the War of 1812 approaches, we are likely to be inundated with a flood of studies of generals on both sides of the conflict. Not surprisingly the first to appear are two biographies of one of the great 'Canadian' heroes of the War: General Sir Isaac Brock. In some ways Brock is a strange choice for canonization. He spent only four years in Canada in a subordinate position and he participated in only two battles during the War of 1812. He did win a decisive victory at Detroit in August 1812, but he was killed a few months later at the beginning of the battle of Queenston Heights. Yet he is perhaps the best remembered of the generals on either side of the American-Canadian border. These two biographies of General Isaac Brock cover much the same ground, using very similar sources. Indeed, they come to very similar conclusions. But they approach their topic very differently. Lieutenant-General Jonathon Riley, the author of A Matter of Honour: The Life, Campaigns and Generalship of Isaac Brock, is himself a distinguished soldier. He has spent 36 years in the British Army and served in a variety of military commands, but he is also a scholar who has written extensively about the history of the British army. His biography is by far the stronger on Brock's early life and military career. As Donald E. Graves notes in his foreword to the book, 'when Jonathon Riley discourses about the art of command, the principles of leadership, the conduct of operations and the effect of terrain and weapons capability on tactics, his words have not only the ring of truth but experience' (p. viii). In the early chapters of the book we learn a good deal about the British army and the context in which Brock functioned. In the early nineteenth century, Riley points out, little was required of a British officer other than that he took care of his men, maintained discipline and showed personal bravery. Brock scored highly on all these points. Riley clearly empathizes with Brock, but he is not an uncritical admirer. He recognizes that Brock, an aggressive general prepared to take risks, was lucky, at least at first. He notes that if Brock had faced the bettertrained and much better-led American army that took the field in 1814, he probably would not have been successful in the dangerous gamble he took at Detroit in 1812. One of the questions which led Riley to undertake his study was to understand why Brock, the general officer commanding all the British and Canadian troops in Upper Canada, met his death at the Battle of Queenston Heights doing the job of a captain. Riley argues that it is 'downright wrong' to criticize Brock for the decision he took to lead the charge against the Americans, for Brock took the decision 'according to the available information and exer- cising his own intuitive judgment' (p. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.010

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207