Lara Kriegel. <i>The Crimean War and its Afterlife: Making Modern Britain</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lara Kriegel’s The Crimean War and its Afterlife traces perceptions of the Crimean War from the conflict in 1853–1856 up to the present. Kriegel argues that “the Crimea’s robust afterlife invites a reconsideration of the imprint of the Victorian age on the making of modern Britain” (12), adding to the examination of the war by Stefanie Markovits’s The Crimean War in the British Imagination and more general considerations of the legacy of the period by Robert Douglas-Fairhurst’s Victorian Afterlives and John Kucich and Dianne F. Sadoff’s much earlier Victorian Afterlife. Following a brief introduction, the book is divided into three parts: Part 1, “Persistence,” addresses travel literature about the Crimean peninsula before, during, and after the legacy of the most famous action of the Battle of Balaklava, the Charge of the Light Brigade. Part 2, “Avatars,” traces the establishment in 1856 of the Victoria cross and its history as well as the efforts from the end of the war onward to maintain sites such as the cemetery at Cathcart’s Hill on the Crimean peninsula as a way to preserve the memory of the fallen. Part 3, “Angels,” examines the original publicity and subsequent myths generated about Florence Nightingale and her gradual eclipse by Mary Seacole as the foremost inspirational story of nursing to emerge from the Crimean War. Finally, a Conclusion briefly addresses the connections between Kriegel’s study of the Crimean War and both Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.036 |
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".