MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4237258953 · doi:10.17760/d20211951

Patrons, politics, and pews

2016· dissertation· en· W4237258953 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ross A. Newton

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMassachusetts Historical Society
KeywordsProtestantismPoliticsIdeologyChapelGospelHistoryNew englandReligious studiesPolitical scienceLawArchaeologyArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation traces the establishment and expansion of the Church of England in New England through Boston Massachusetts' three interrelated Anglican Churches, from the establishment of Boston's King's Chapel in 1686, as the first Anglican Church in New England, until the formation of the American Protestant Episcopal Church in the years immediately following the American Revolution. Using church vestry records, proprietor records, financial records, correspondence, and material culture, such as pews and communion silver, this project focuses on lay patrons and members of the community who participated in church governance and financially supported or otherwise aided church institutions and fellow congregants. Though rooted in Boston, this project examines a loose transatlantic network of patrons and interest groups, who leveraged their commercial and political expertise for the benefit of individual churches and the advancement of Anglicanism in New England. Working with imperial organs such as the London-based Society of the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, Boston's Anglican societies profoundly reshaped the religious landscape of New England and provided for the religious needs of a diverse body of elites and persons of middling and poor means, as well as a sizable number of free and enslaved African Americans. Though the Church of England stood as a symbol of royal authority and Anglicans often served as agents of royal authority, Anglican political ideologies varied by class, occupation, and office, and was never synonymous with loyalism. This project reexamines early protests against Parliamentary measures and authority finding that lay Anglicans featured prominently in these debates and reacted pragmatically as events unfolded in Boston and in the countryside. Even as a number of Anglican loyalists removed to Halifax and England, Anglicans who remained in Boston rewrote the Book of Common Prayer to align with shifting allegiances and theologies and fashion lasting American institutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→