MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2957776791 · doi:10.1080/1081602x.2019.1631873

Interracial marriages in twentieth-century Cape Town: evidence from Anglican marriage records

2019· article· en· W2957776791 on OpenAlexaff
Johan Fourie, Kris Inwood

Bibliographic record

VenueThe History of the Family · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorAndrew W. Mellon Foundation
KeywordsPromulgationCapeLawPolitical scienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most controversial laws promulgated by the National Party as part of South Africa’s mid-twentieth century apartheid policies was the 1949 Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act. This Act stipulated that ‘a marriage between a European and non-European may not be solemnized, and any such marriage solemnized in contravention of the provisions of this section shall be void and of null effect’. We use more than 23,000 newly-transcribed Anglican marriage records of Cape Town for the period 1911 to 1964 to show that the Act had mostly followed, and not led, changing interracial marriage practices. In the years before the Act’s promulgation, interracial marriages were rare and on the decline, despite the fact that apartheid-era policies had not yet been institutionalized. Our results suggests that marriage behaviour in Cape Town, and probably in South Africa more generally, was shaped by racial stratification early in the twentieth century. The Prohibition of Mixed Marriages Act of 1949, although devastating to those affected, was a correlate to rather than the cause of changing marriage behaviour.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.274
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 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe History of the FamilySame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207