Bibliographic record
Abstract
I n 1813 the addition of the "Pious Clause" 1 to the East India Company Charter removed barriers that had previously prevented Christian missionaries from settling in India.Although both Christianity and Christian missionary groups had long been present on the subcontinent, the removal of these restrictions ushered in a new era of missionary societies.In South India, where the Danish Protestant missionaries at Tranquebar had been present since 1706, the Pious Clause heralded the entry of numerous new Protestant missions.Reminiscent of the Tranquebar mission, these new missions centered their evangelical projects on the low-caste devotees of village religions and dutifully recorded their findings in letters, autobiographies, and other non-fiction works.The writings of both missionary eras focused on similar topics, with many pages devoted to the discussion of village Hinduism and its relation to caste, disease, and ritual.However, there is a clear shift in tone and style that differentiates the writings of the two eras; although the earlier writings do not promote village religion or even react to it in a neutral fashion, their anthropological style is markedly different from the emotional details and need for rescue that are emphasized in the later writings.I argue that this shift can be partly attributed to the development 2. Michael Mann, "'Torchbearers upon the Path of Progress': Britain's Ideology of a 'Moral and Material Progress' in India.An Introductory Essay," in Colonialism as Civilizing Mission: Cultural Ideology in British India, ed.Harald Fischer-Tiné and Michael Mann (London: Wimbledon Publishing Company, 2004), 4. 3.Copland, "Christianity as an Arm of Empire," 1039.4. Mann, "'Torchbearers upon the Path of Progress'," 10.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".