MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214498946 · doi:10.3366/brw.2022.0379

The First ‘British’ Colony in the Americas: Inter-kingdom Cooperation and Stuart-British Ideology in the Colonisation of Newfoundland, 1616–1640

2022· article· en· W4214498946 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joseph Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueBritain and the World · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicScottish History and National Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBritishnessScotsWelshBritish EmpireHistoryIrishIdentity (music)EmpirePoliticsHome ruleNational identityCornishIdeologyLong nineteenth centuryGenealogyLawAncient historyPolitical scienceArchaeologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accession of James VI, the Stewart (or Stuart) King of Scots, to the thrones of England and Ireland in 1603 renewed debates about ‘Britishness’. Many of the king’s attempts to popularise and codify his version of the concept were unsuccessful. His vision for closer political union between England and Scotland did not come to pass until 1707 and most historians attribute the formation of British identity to the eighteenth century. Most influentially, Linda Colley has argued that British identity was forged in the crucible of eighteenth-century empire-building as English, Scottish, and Welsh people lived, worked, and fought together across the globe in defence of shared values. English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish people and interests likewise coalesced in the pursuit of empire in the early seventeenth century. They cooperated in attempts to colonise Newfoundland and explicitly promoted the project as British. The Newfoundland example shows that James’ British vision had some success. This article examines the project’s ‘Britishness’ and argues that the 1603 union of the crowns’ role in the formation of British identity and its impact on overseas expansion requires additional attention.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritain and the WorldSame topicScottish History and National IdentityFrench-language works237,207