Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This chapter examines the remarkable prevalence of popular disorder in eighteenth-century England. It examines the background to the 1715 Riot Act and reasons why the authorities had such difficulty in avoiding or controlling riotous assemblies. The chapter looks at the causes and character of major disorders, such as the extensive food riots, and suggests they may be better understood by using the model of ‘moral economy’ and recognizing that many popular protests evinced a deep-rooted belief in the liberties and rights of the citizen, encompassed in the idea of the ‘free-born Englishman’. Between them, these constituted a model for social and political relations which might at times prove acceptable to their rulers, if only grudgingly. It examines how attitudes amongst the elites towards disorder hardened in the last quarter of the century, undermining the effectiveness of protest after 1800. It suggests that the transition into the nineteenth century from riotous assemblies to more peaceful popular protests demanding the vote might be seen less as a ‘modernization’ of protest but more as stemming from the realization that older, more ‘riotous’, means of redress were no longer proving effective.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.002 |
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.
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".