Restoring Anáhuac: Indigenous Genealogies and Hemispheric Republicanism in Postcolonial Mexico
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article turns to postcolonial Mexico to analyze the importance of Indigenous political thought for the transformation of radical republicanism during the Age of Revolutions. I argue that Mexican insurgents deployed Indigenous genealogies to instantiate what I call “restorative revolution,” a form of revolutionary thinking that prioritized memorialization over absolute foundation. Mexico's restorative project began with calls for the return of the Anáhuac Empire, an Indigenous genealogy that memorialized histories of popular self‐rule to legitimize postcolonial demands. I suggest that the Anáhuac movement transformed the principles of radical republican thought by mobilizing around religious, plebeian, and hemispheric identities. Each of these characteristics problematizes dominant interpretations of republicanism as a secular, elite, and national enterprise. This article uses popular objects and archival ephemera to illustrate the importance of engaging with the political contributions of marginalized groups from the spaces, practice, and languages they used to envision postcolonial emancipation in collective terms.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".