Bibliographic record
Abstract
When considering Scotland’s place in the Enlightenment, the nation’s economic growth, its investments in universities and education, and eighteenth-century Scotland’s place as Europe’s centre for scientific and medical research loom large—as do the writings and ideas of thinkers such as Frances Hutcheson, Adam Smith, James Hutton, Thomas Reid, and David Hume. However, these developments, while impressive, barely encapsulate all of the changes which Scotland experienced during the Age of Enlightenment. The Scottish Highlands, for instance, underwent immense changes during the Age of Enlightenment, as the region—which had been economically, socially, and culturally distinct from the rest of Scotland since the Middle Ages—was increasingly integrated into the rest of Scotland and the British Empire through the commercialization of estates, the spread of the market economy, and the breakdown of the traditional clan system—resulting in widespread emigration from the Highlands to the Lowlands or overseas colonies. This paper thus explores the historiographical place of the Scottish Highlands in the Enlightenment, examining how and why historians have connected or disconnected the region from the intellectual and cultural movement. Beginning with a review of earlier seminal works which portrayed the eighteenth-century Highlands as a backward region shaped by “inevitable” external forces, and closing with more recent works which refute those of earlier decades and emphasize the complexity of the Highlands, as well as works which contend that the changes experienced in the eighteenth-century Scottish Highlands were a direct result of Enlightenment ideals and developments.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".