MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322714146 · doi:10.1017/9781846158810.006

Guts and Governance: Honour Culture and Colonial Administration

2010· other· en· W4322714146 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonialism, slavery, and trade
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonourEliteColonialismDominionPoliticsLawHistoryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the previous chapter has demonstrated there were many sections of society into which the ideals of the duellists barely penetrated. Nevertheless honour culture was particularly entrenched within those very groups of gentlemen who were most likely to be tasked with service abroad, that is to say within the military and the political and administrative elite. Honour culture had an important role to play in the mentality of those administering His Majesty's colonial possessions, sustaining the homogeneity of a class over great distances and yet at the same time posing, as we shall see, constant threats to good governance. It was, of course, in the Americas that honour culture was most successfully implanted, but unfortunately, justice to the rich history of American duelling cannot be done here. Since revolution and independence came early within our period, I shall not pursue the American duel with vigour. Instead I have chosen to focus upon the remaining North American possession, Canada, and to compare duelling there with honour culture in an area of British dominion that was only later to become part of the empire, that is to say, those parts of India that were as yet still under the aegis of the East India Company. Naturally, honourable conduct in each location was influenced by dynamics sometimes peculiar to the local situation; small gentlemanly societies picked up nuances of their own. Differences between Canadian society and that of the British in India are easy to observe. However, the empire was inter connected and facets of behaviour were sufficiently uniform that, as aforementioned, the different gentlemanly societies in each location nevertheless formed a single cultural whole. As we shall see, men, and their disputes and reputations, moved between communities: a Canadian barrister became a judge in Sierra Leone; a quarrel between Indian administrators resulted in a duel in London; a dispute at Portsmouth was played out before the garrison at Gibraltar; and so on. The language of honour that was spoken in such disputes served along with a common heritage of law, of history and of fealty to unite men in very varied situations.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.033
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColonialism, slavery, and tradeFrench-language works237,207