The March of Mind: Knowledge Mobilization in the 1820s
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phrases “march of mind” and “march of intellect” proliferated in late-Romantic discourse, especially during the 1820s when they were associated with the interventions of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge (SDUK). The SDUK’s promotion of educational and moral betterment for the working classes, among other things through the publication and circulation of cheap reading material, was associated both seriously and satirically with a progressive “march of intellect.” This phrase provokes questions about individual and collective agency and responsibility: whose intellect is marching, where to, and to the beat of whose drum? Poets, novelists, journalists, and illustrators appropriated the “march of mind” trope so as to open up alternative perspectives on the direction, speed, extent, and inclusiveness or exclusiveness of knowledge mobilization during the 1820s. This essay explores their creative and entertaining responses to the “march,” and thereby considers how we might approach this aspect of late-Romantic culture through a combination of literary-cultural studies, book history, and mobility studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it