MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402337513 · doi:10.1093/ahr/rhae331

Michalis Sotiropoulos. <i>Liberalism after the Revolution: The Intellectual Foundations of the Greek State, c. 1830–1880</i>.

2024· article· en· W4402337513 on OpenAlexaff
Sakis Gekas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Historical Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiberalismState (computer science)PhilosophyPolitical scienceHistoryLawMathematicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the 1821 revolution, Greece emerged as a state in ambiguity. The three “Great Powers” (Britain, France, Russia) were “protecting” it, while the Ottomans, after being forced to grant independence in 1830, never called Greece a “state” but instead a “government” or “the country of the Greeks” and “Greek authority,” words reminiscent of an autonomous tributary region, not an independent state. Michalis Sotiropoulos’s book Liberalism after the Revolution: The Intellectual Foundations of the Greek State, c. 1830–1880 explains how the new state that was built severed connections to its Ottoman past, was founded on a liberal tradition, and left a legacy that is now, by and large, forgotten at the very moment many states are moving away from their liberal and democratic values. So, the book has an intended, or at least unstated, contemporary dimension that will interest historians and a general audience alike. Sotiropoulos revisits the history of the Greek state, looking outward and conversing with a broad historiography rather than staring inward and regurgitating unfounded arguments about the “backwardness” or even (in the post-2009 period) the “failure” of the Greek state. The book examines the intellectual biographies of liberal “jurists” (as the author calls them), offering a narrative of the intellectual foundations of the Greek state in the post-revolution period and through the constitutional changes of 1844 and 1864. The Greek state emerged as a particular liberal formation: liberal jurists strove to follow the radical revolutionary legacy within the constraints that the Bavarian monarchy placed on it when it took over in 1833, pioneering or translating for the Greek context ideas about property, constitutionalism, the law. Sotiropoulos makes a compelling argument about how and why Greek liberal jurists instrumentalized jurisprudence to promote a form of state in opposition to the “police state” (Polizeistaat) that the Bavarian king and his supporters founded. This form of “practical statecraft” maintained the radical tenets of liberalism at a time when it was being abandoned elsewhere in Europe (5). The author does not remain in the realm of ideas amounting to an older intellectual history; rather, he integrates the political context in which Greek liberalism was formed into his narrative, offering a type of “practical intellectual history,” as he calls it (6).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueThe American Historical ReviewSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207