MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951401849 · doi:10.1017/9781787444904.004

‘Restoration’ England and the history of sociability

2019· book-chapter· en· W2951401849 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Cowan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicScottish History and National Identity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

THE RESTORATION has always held a somewhat awkward place in the broader narrative of English history. On the one hand, it has been seen as the endpoint to a turbulent Stuart century riven by civil wars and revolutionary regime changes. William of Orange's invasion by invitation and the Glorious Revolution that gave him the crowns to England, Scotland and Ireland is remarkable, in this perspective, only because the constitutional settlement which it provoked happened to endure for much longer than that of the previous Stuart regimes. Because of the significance accorded here to the Glorious Revolution, this perspective has mainly been adopted by political historians, particularly those with Whiggish sympathies. Its most famous articulation may be found in Thomas Babington Macaulay's History of England from the Accession of James II (1848), but it remains alive and well in the work of contemporary historians such as Steven Pincus and Tim Harris. On the other hand, the Restoration era is sometimes understood not as the ending but, rather, as the beginning of a new era: the soi disant ‘ long eighteenth century’. Here, the Restoration era inaugurates the construction of a distinctly English old regime, one which managed to survive the age of the French revolution and persisted until at least the passing of the First Reform Act of 1832, and perhaps even longer than that. While the most vociferous promulgator of this argument for a long eighteenth-century English old regime has been Jonathan Clark, for whom the pillars of eighteenth-century society were the monarchy, the established church and the aristocracy, he has found unlikely fellow travellers amongst a host of cultural and social historians who may disagree with Clark's argument for Anglican monarcho-aristocratic hegemony but who nevertheless see lines of continuity from the restoration of the Stuarts in 1660 until at least the long reign of George III. Historians such as Clark and Roy Porter disagreed deeply about the nature of English society in the long eighteenth century, but they agreed that the period began not in 1700, or even 1688–89, but decades earlier, with the Restoration in 1660.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.025
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.159 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicScottish History and National IdentityFrench-language works237,207