MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393361936 · doi:10.2979/vic.00036

Empire News: The Anglo-Indian Press Writes India by Priti Joshi, and: Writing the Empire: The McIlwraiths, 1853–1948 by Eva-Marie Kröller (review)

2023· article· en· W4393361936 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVictorian Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicColonial History and Postcolonial Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpireHistoryEconomic historyAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Empire News: The Anglo-Indian Press Writes India by Priti Joshi, and: Writing the Empire: The McIlwraiths, 1853–1948 by Eva-Marie Kröller David Finkelstein (bio) Empire News: The Anglo-Indian Press Writes India, by Priti Joshi; pp. xvi + 261. Albany: SUNY Press, 2021, $95.00, $32.95 paper. Writing the Empire: The McIlwraiths, 1853–1948, by Eva-Marie Kröller; pp. xvi + 519. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2021, $110.00. Over the past few decades, we have seen an increase in publications exploring the British colonial world as a space of contestation and complication. Such work has served to deepen our understanding of colonial spaces as complex areas through which a number of players navigated in different ways. Two works take opposing points of view to cover similar questions. Empire News: The Anglo-Indian Press Writes India, by Priti Joshi, discusses constructions of empire from the perspective of nineteenth-century Indian communication structures. It is a study of press outputs produced within India for local consumption, and the results show a world of hurried news gathering and information sharing that would be familiar to many students of journalistic practices. Writing the Empire: The McIlwraiths, 1853–1948, by Eva-Marie Kröller, approaches the subject through a holistic genealogical study of a family deeply embedded in the colonial world, scattered and engaged across Britain's many colonies as administrators, cultural commentators, popular novelists, anthropologists, and educationalists. The result is a family history drawing on personal documents to present a closely argued study of how British imperial structures affected interpersonal responses to local environments and cultures. Joshi's work is a historically inflected study that makes use of archives, where they have survived, and original documentation to build a picture of the Indo-British press as it operated during a key period of British settlement. Joshi's ambition is to explore what has been described as the high noon of the British Raj (when power became concentrated in official colonial structures of governance between the 1830s and 1860s), and the subsequent responses to this shift from establishment and counter-colonial voices in the local press. This was a period when British territorial expansion slowed, while its colonial bureaucracy expanded. Joshi provides illuminating examples of transactional exchanges between English-language and vernacular press in Indian circles, re-evaluating such cultural connections through in-depth studies of five key English-language newspapers from Calcutta, Serampore, and nearby provinces (the Mofussilite [1845–1876], the Bengal Hurkaru: and Chronicle [1795–1866], the Friend of India [1835–76], the Englishman [1861–1934], and the Hindoo Patriot [1853–1922]), as well as a small number of other press publications edited by Anglo-Indians of various political persuasions. [End Page 535] What emerges is a finely detailed study of news circulation in provincial and regional spaces during key periods of change and crisis, the latter not least exemplified by the chaos that engulfed India during the Indian insurgency and uprising of 1857. Information during this period became valuable currency, and Joshi draws our attention to the multiple movements of news from colony to metropole and the circulation of material within regional settings. She offers convincing evidence that the press in India was not a monolithic construct of periodical voices, but at times a contradictory space of competing views shaped by the journalistic need for copy, access or lack of access to sources, and volatility in the business of press production, distribution, and circulation. The newspaper business in India was not a strong or stable space. There was a high failure rate among newspaper start-ups, due in part to volatile readership numbers that ranged from an average of thirty-five for the Hindoo Patriot to a more viable 3,500 for the Friend of India. One of the unusually long-lived examples covered by Joshi was the Mofusillite, edited mainly by transplanted Australian John Lang from 1845 through to his death in 1864, and which during its heyday in the late 1840s could count on a subscription level of about 800 per issue. Joshi spends time offering welcome analysis of Lang's role as a thorn in the side of the colonial establishment, both...

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.302 · 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