How Derek Morris and Kenneth Cozens are rewriting the maritime history of East London North of the Thames: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In three books published to date, two London-based researchers, Derek Morris and Kenneth Cozens, have set about the task of challenging many deeply-held stereotypes of London's eastern parishes in the eighteenth century.With meticulous attention to detail, and with sure control of a wide range of archives, they have produced three highly-recommended works.The books Mile End and Wapping are in very short supply, if not by the time of this review, only available on the second-hand market.In Whitechapel, with the completion of the first phase of their research, they have ignored the restrictions imposed by parish boundaries: they have begun to draw conclusions about the nature of society in these areas in the eighteenth century.This is welcome for a number of reasons.But chief among these is that for too long historians have relied on a series of stereotypes with the emphasis on poverty, crime and "dirty industries," to portray these eastern parishes, when in fact the emphasis should be on the important role played by local entrepreneurs in London's growing economy and worldwide trading networks.Eagerly awaited, and expected in 2014, is their fourth book on these eastern parishes.The title will be Shadwell and Ratcliff: 1600-1800: A Social History of two Thames-side Communities.East of the Tower of London and the eastern boundary of the City of London (that compressed power of financial wealth that remains to this day a nodule of world commerce and global influence) lie a series of older communities and parishes.They are now bundled into the title for local government purposes as Tower Hamlets.Included in this broader name are such places as Whitechapel, Wapping-Stepney, Shadwell, Ratcliff, Limehouse and Poplar, all on or near the River Thames.To the north are situated, almost The Northern Mariner/le marin du nord, XXIII No. 4, (October 2013), 413-418
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".