MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

<em>British Engineers and Africa, 1875–1914</em>, by Casper Andersen

2014· article· en· W64913985 on OpenAlex
Ratcliff

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 · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpireColonialismGeorge (robot)PublishingExhibitionHistoryArt historyAncient historyArchaeologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: British Engineers and Africa, 1875–1914 by Casper Andersen Jessica Ratcliff (bio) British Engineers and Africa, 1875–1914, by Casper Andersen; pp. xi + 229. London and Brookfield, VT: Pickering & Chatto, 2011. £60.00, $99.00. In 1910, at the prestigious address of 1 Great George Street, Westminster, the Institute of Civil Engineers (ICE) built a luxurious new headquarters and fitted it out with great columns, extravagant chandeliers, broad mahogany staircases, and stately halls and meeting rooms. The façade was ornamented with floral symbols of Britain and the Empire: “the Tudor rose, thistle and daffodil representing Britain (including Ireland); the maple leaf for Canada; for New Zealand the silver fern; a protea species for South Africa; the golden wattle for Australia; a palm leaf for all the Crown Colonies; and lotus flowers to represent India” (46). Material for the building included timber and other products from various parts of the Empire, symbolizing, as was explained in the pages of the trade journal African Engineering, “the close relationship of those who constitute the Institution of Civil Engineers in all parts of the world” (qtd. in Andersen 46). The international and colonial contingent of ICE membership had indeed grown steadily since its founding in 1871, and by 1912 twenty-two percent of the ICE members resided in the colonies, 376 of them (five percent) in Africa. Through active correspondence and publishing, and the organization of international conferences and committees, the ICE did manage to sustain and grow a professional network throughout the Empire, even while other factors—the grand new headquarters, for one—ensured that the [End Page 293] center of power for the profession remained firmly in London. At the helm of the profession was the so-called Great George Street Clique: the consulting engineers to whom Government would turn when seeking expertise for, say, a rail line into Rhodesia, or a dam across the Nile. To this professional elite in London, Africa represented many things: a rhetorical space to display engineering-as-civilization, a testing ground for young recruits, a stage for the self-styled explorer engineer, and most of all a vast new market for lucrative contracts. Casper Andersen covers these themes and much more in this important study of the ways in which the civil engineering profession in London shaped and was shaped by Britain’s colonial entanglement with Africa. The book’s title, British Engineers and Africa, suggests a broad scope, and some readers might be disappointed to find that in fact Andersen has limited himself, firstly, to the engineering community in London—the subject is not engineers in Africa but engineers and Africa—and secondly to a subset of that category, the domain of the civil engineer. Most of the book relates through different channels back to the ICE, which emerges as the center of gravity of this study. As Andersen ably demonstrates, this aspect of engineering history is worthy of such close study. Andersen’s choice of subject is especially valuable in that it brings into focus the interpersonal and fine-fibered, but still very consequential, relationships between private engineering firms and various imperial offices of government. Given that much of the historiography of technology and imperialism has focused on the military’s engineering branches such as the Royal Engineers, the Royal Artillery, and the Ordnance Survey, Andersen’s story of the civil engineering firms and empire is particularly welcome. Throughout the book, Andersen employs a wide range of analytical approaches, drawing on the work of, among others, Christine MacLeod, Ben Marsden and Crosbie Smith, Felix Driver, John Darwin, Simon J. Potter, and Andrew S. Thompson. It is Thompson whom Andersen follows most closely, by “exploring the ways in which empire ‘struck back’ at the engineering profession, while knowing that it was more likely to do so in complex, unequal ways” (3). Andersen’s methodological approach is almost prosopographical; considerable effort has gone into analyzing the civil engineering community around Great George Street as well as the membership of the ICE, producing several impressive tables breaking down various features of these groups. In terms of sources, the work draws heavily from popular trade journals such as Engineer, Feilden’s Magazine, African Engineering, and...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.228 · 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