100 Years of Peace among English‐Speaking People: Anglo‐American Cultural Diplomacy, 1909–1921
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the early twentieth century, peace activists looked for historic examples of successful conflict resolution to inspire their movement. The centennial of the Treaty of Ghent (1814) became a focal point in their efforts. The treaty ended the last war fought between the British Empire and the United States and, as the 1914 centennial approached, peace activists fashioned a celebration called “100 Years of Peace among English‐speaking Peoples.” The Great War postponed their plans, but after the armistice, American, British, and Canadian activists worked to develop a scheme of commemoration that eventually culminated in the erection of statues, the foundation of education exchanges, and the inauguration of heritage centers. With the support of their governments, the campaign became an important cultural diplomacy program. This article examines that program and the intersection of private networks of activists with government officials. In doing so, it shows how early twentieth century statecraft utilized cultural assets. It also explores the legacy of cultural assets on international relations, how cultural diplomacy underwrites foreign policies, and how cultural programs can perpetuate feelings of goodwill over the course of generations. The program to celebrate 100 Years of Peace among English‐speaking Peoples obscured fissures in the Anglo‐American relationship at the end of the Great War, and the cultural diplomacy continues as a symbol of Anglo‐American rapprochement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".