Bibliographic record
Abstract
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Any reader of MichaelProvence’s study of the Great Syrian Revolt of 1925 might be forgiven suchcynicism. Here is a fine and well-documented example of an earlier attemptby a western power to come to grips with the Middle East – with unfortunateresults. It involved foreigners infallibly confident in themselves andtheir mission, compliant local elites out for self-aggrandizement, insurgentspreaching religious-inflected nationalism, the gulf between all three, and theensuing horror. The Great Syrian Revolt was a pivotal event both for Syriaand for Arabs at large. It allowed the former to conceptualize themselves asa nation while serving as an exemplar for the latter, thereby playing a formativerole in the development of national consciousness in the region. Byinfluencing the Baathist movement two decades later, it had ramificationsfar beyond its failure.Provence devotes much of the first chapter to staking out interesting theoreticalground. Rejecting the notion of insurrection as being largely a battleof ideas directed by intellectuals, he argues persuasively for an approachto the rebellion centered on a rural, rather than an urban, setting and for acasus belli founded on French misrule and economic relations between differingclasses of Syrian society. His central thesis is that the grain tradebetween the Druze in the fertile Hawran region of southern Syria andmiddle-class merchants, mostly from the Maydan quarter of Damascus, wasthe central axis upon which the revolt turned.Such an approach has its drawbacks, namely, the paucity of documentaryevidence from contemporary rural Syria. Much of the latter half of thefirst chapter is devoted to this difficulty. In casting a judicious eye over therange of primary source material, both French and Arabic, Provence ...
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".