The Victorian Art of Mourning: The evolution of mourning and funeral customs during the reign of Queen Victoria from 1837 to 1901.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation examines the evolution of mourning and funeral customs during the reign of Queen Victoria, from the time period 1837 to 1901. The Victorian era has long been perceived to have been the time period in which the height of both mourning and funeral customs were achieved in British society, and through research into the topic this dissertation investigates how true this statement is. \nThe topic shall be explored through examining three royal funerals which took place during the era: the funeral of King William IV which occurred in 1837, with his death leading to start of the Victorian era; the Prince Consort’s funeral in 1861 which will be used as the midpoint comparison in this study, his death and Queen Victoria’s subsequent mourning was highly influential on mourning culture towards the middle of the era; and finally, the funeral of Queen Victoria. Her death meant the beginning of new era and ushered in a new chapter in mourning and funeral customs. Royal funerals had long set the precedent to which society based their mourning and funeral traditions on, and they will be used in this dissertation of indicators of changes within the customs. \nThe conclusion of the research gathered is that mourning and funeral customs did not progress at the same rate, and were subsequently at odds with each other during the era. Whilst the height of mourning customs and etiquette did indeed occur during the Victorian era; the tradition of ostentatious and lavish funerals was already in decline by the start of the era.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".