MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142671005 · doi:10.1017/9781800101029.007

Colonial Maritime Defence and Piracy in North America

2021· other· en· W3142671005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMaritime Security and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismGeographyPolitical scienceOceanographyHistoryAncient historyArchaeologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In October 1717, Governor Walter Hamilton of the Leeward Islands reported to the Board of Trade that pirates who had formerly been impacting Caribbean trade had “all gon[e] to north america, or to some other parts”. This report coincided with the peak of pirate activity in North America, when pirates voyaged from New Providence and the Caribbean to the North American coast. Arriving in the summer and autumn months of 1717 and 1718, pirates targeted capes near to colonial ports for a short period, intercepting vessels before moving northward to the next chokepoint. They then returned to the Caribbean at the end of autumn to avoid the winter storms, before returning in spring. Throughout 1717 and 1718, there were frequent complaints of pirates operating in the capes and inlets off South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Pennsylvania, New York, Rhode Island and Massachusetts, with attacks reported as far as Cape Sables in Newfoundland. While the number of vessels plundered by pirates in North America was relatively small over the duration of these two years, the short-term concentration of piratical attacks within colonial capes had an intermittent yet significant impact on regional trade. This, in turn, encouraged a number of local initiatives intended to chase pirates from nearby waters. The success of British anti-piracy expeditions in North America in 1718, particularly against Edward Thache in North Carolina and Stede Bonnet in South Carolina, has ensured their inclusion in most studies of Atlantic piracy. Yet, these discussions provide little consideration of the organisation, funding and motivations behind these voyages, and do not consider what they suggest about the state of maritime defence in early eighteenth-century British North America. Instead, these expeditions are viewed as a turning point in a unified imperial project to curtail piracy throughout the British Atlantic. This aligns to the wider historiography of the British Atlantic, in which colonial maritime defence – including that provided by the Royal Navy – has received little focus beyond wartime privateering or naval assaults. Unlike British Caribbean colonies, which had largely been absorbed into royal control, British colonies settled along the eastern coast of North America continued to be made up of an assortment of royal and private colonies.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMaritime Security and HistoryFrench-language works237,207