Voluntarism and Imperial Supremacy: Politics and the Military Establishment in the Expansion of the British Empire in French North America, 1760-1775
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation explores the tensions between two ideological facets of the British empire—voluntarism and imperial supremacy—that emerged after the Seven Years’ War as British officials attempted to come to terms with the territorial expansion and the increased diversity of their empire.In the immediate aftermath of the war, few perceived any challenges incorporating diverse peoples like Catholic, francophone Canadians into the Protestant British empire because most perceived commerce, not ethnicity or religion, as the empire’s principle mechanism for gaining and maintaining loyalty of disparate peoples.At the same time, the empire pursued a policy of imperial supremacy in North America: a deliberate attempt to exclude foreign competitors from the continent to ensure the security of the provinces.Through a series of successive crises that stretched the limits of the empire’s resources throughout the continent, imperial officials slowly began to codify inequality in the laws and governance of its provinces, which had the effect of cementing social, political and economic distinctions between different groups in order to exploit those differences and allow the empire to draw directly on provincial societies for men and material in pursuit of maintaining Britain’s supremacy over the continent.This process emerged in full force in Quebec, where a series of challenges compounded to produce a political settlement that almost fully subordinated the province to the empire’s control.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".