Canada or Guadeloupe?: French and British Perceptions of Empire, 1760–1763
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The debate that arose in France and Britain over which concession to favour, Canada or Guadeloupe, in the peace negotiations towards the end of the Seven Years' War was a significant historical moment, one in which imperial perceptions can be compared. The different directions taken by the two empires following the war – France's turn towards its maritime and tropical interests, Britain's move from commercial and maritime regulation to the assertion of territorial control over its colonies – suggest that the two nations thought differently about empire. A close examination, however, of discussions in both over the fate of Canada prior to the Treaty of Paris indicates a common intellectual foundation to very different imperial policies. This foundation complicates the dichotomy of a modern, dynamic British empire and a narrowly mercantilist French one. Writers in both empires advanced arguments that, to various degrees, prioritized wealth and security. They reveal a common understanding of the necessary components to increase the power and prosperity of a state and an attempt to come to terms with the growing geopolitical importance of America to standing in Europe. Differences between the empires were, in many respects, ones of degree, not kind.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".