A ‘Triumph of Federalism’? The German Empire in Debates on Irish Home Rule before the First World War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In March 1911, John Redmond published a newspaper article praising the German Empire as ‘the most convincing proof of the triumph of federalism’. While foreign and colonial analogies – ranging from Canada and the United States to Switzerland and Austria-Hungary – had been a regular feature in debates on Irish Home Rule since the 1870s, Redmond’s whole-hearted expression of admiration for constitutional arrangements in Imperial Germany came as a surprise to many contemporaries. Yet it bears witness to a renewed interest in German federalism among Irish nationalists following the granting of ‘Home Rule’ to Alsace-Lorraine in 1911, a development that generated regular comparisons with Ireland’s position within the United Kingdom during the Home Rule crisis of 1912-1914. By exploring the frequent and contested parallels drawn between Ireland (or in some cases Ulster) and Alsace-Lorraine by both unionists and nationalists during this period, this article not only highlights the ambiguities and complexities of Irish views of Germany on the eve of the First World War but also reveals the multiple ways in which the debate on Home Rule, and on federalism within the United Kingdom more generally, were influenced by wider European developments during this period of rising domestic and international tension.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".