Living in Long Shadows: Reactions in New Orleans to French Emancipation, 1804-1876
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nineteenth-century America is often reduced in our minds to little more than the Civil War, glossing over one of the most transformative periods in American history. Cities and communities nationwide, though particularly those in the South, saw recurrent conflict and revolt for decades before and after the war. New Orleans, itself heavily dependent upon the institution of slavery, is unique as it was affected by tensions rising not only in the United States, but elsewhere in the world. Newspapers served as major sources of information throughout the nineteenth century, and Louisianans’ reactions (or in some cases, the lack of a reaction) to pivotal events in the history of slavery speaks volumes. This project examines the responses of New Orleanians to Southern slave revolts and the tumultuous emancipation of French colonial slaves through the analysis of newspaper reports and personal accounts. To better understand these reactions, it is critical to recognize the dramatic effects the slave rebellion in the former French colony of Saint-Domingue from 1791 to 1804 had on the residents of New Orleans. The city itself remains ripe with French influence long after its time as French territory, and the memory of its slaveholding past is still palpable from the banks of the Mississippi River through the French Quarter and beyond. This project serves as a lens for the connection of Caribbean, European, and American history through the happenings in one location and reflecting Southern opinions on the Atlantic world from the Haitian Revolution to Reconstruction. The paranoia-ridden Southern mindset, constantly overshadowed by the fear of similar slave rebellions to those in Haiti, influenced not only the development of Louisiana and the rest of the United States, but the ways in which the history of slavery is studied and represented.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.010 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".