Andreas Guidi. <i>Generations of Empire: Youth from Ottoman to Italian Rule in the Mediterranean</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Andreas Guidi’s Generations of Empire: Youth from Ottoman to Italian rule in the Mediterranean is a refreshingly innovative study that expands our understanding of modern empires by considering the social experiences of imperial subjects. In 1912, the Dodecanese, a collection of largely Greek islands located off the southwestern coast of Anatolia, passed from Ottoman to Italian hands. The book focuses on Rhodes, by far largest island, and more specifically its multiethnic capital, also (confusingly) called “Rhodes,” where the largest single group was Turkish-speaking Muslims, followed closely by Greek-speaking Orthodox Christians, but which also had a thriving Ladino-speaking Jewish community and an expanding community of Italian-speaking Catholics. The author begins by asserting that even the most modern of empires, like that of Fascist Italy, adapted the repertoires of rule of seemingly premodern and decrepit ones, like the Ottoman Empire. “Ottoman elements made Italian rule,” says Guidi, “just as Italian rule unmade them” (10). Despite Italian colonialism’s strident claims to be a civilizing force that brought Rhodes into the twentieth century—anyone visiting Rhodes today will see a magnificent built environment of renovated medieval fortifications and richly ornate Italian buildings that locals will say was a legacy “of the Italians” (“τον Ιταλών”)—the author shows how much the colonizers relied on the institutions and practices of the previous regime. However, while this claim is confirmed through the body of this work, one will find that much more is said about how the colonized responded to these changes.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
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".