MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938048078

Seeking Zion: Grace Aguilar’s Religious Nationalism

2018· article· en· W2938048078 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lindsay Katzir

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen in Judaism A Multidisciplinary e-Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZionismJudaismNationalismJewish stateReligious studiesPoliticsState (computer science)Anti-ZionismHistoryJewish studiesSociologyPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawArchaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article looks at Grace Aguilar (1816–1847), a well-known Anglo-Jewish author, as a religious Zionist, and it analyzes Aguilar’s work in order to challenge three scholarly assumptions about the history of Zionism. First, that British Jews have never genuinely supported Zionism; second, that Zionism did not exist before Theodor Herzl, the founder of political Zionism; and third, that Jewish women rarely voiced Zionist ideas before the establishment of the State of Israel. Aguilar, an Anglo-Jewish woman writer, published during the mid-Victorian period, when she espoused orthodox views about the Jews’ restoration to Palestine. Aguilar’s belief in the biblical precept of Jewish nationhood was a precursor to the thought of later Zionists such as Herzl, as well as the convictions of religious Zionists such as Rav Kook. Her religious nationalism provides an important counterpoint to scholarly claims that Victorian Jews identified only as British, as no different than their Christian neighbors. Instead, Aguilar characterizes the Jews as a nation apart, a people bound together by an ancient religion with roots (and a future) in Palestine.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen in Judaism A Multidisciplinary e-JournalSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207