MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7119835446 · doi:10.1515/9781805438946

The Grand Tour of Prince George of Denmark in England, 1669

2025· book· W7119835446 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBoydell and Brewer eBooks · 2025
Typebook
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Influence and Diplomacy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)WindsorQueen (butterfly)ReignHistoriographyPoliticsEliteWelsh

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This annotated diary describes the politics, cultural richness and practicalities of elite educational travel in England during the early reign of Charles II. Prince George of Denmark is best known to Anglophone historiography for having married Queen Anne of Great Britain, in 1683. This critical edition of the diary detailing the Prince's Grand Tour in England, which took place in the summer of 1669, sheds light on the critical complexity of George's role within Stuart political history, a role that commenced during his youthful, incognito travels. The Grand Tour was an important rite of passage introducing young princes to the European political stage, and the ongoing political, ceremonial and multilingual exchanges characterising Baroque diplomacy. From his base in York House, London, Prince George's itinerary ranged from Canterbury Cathedral, to the fleet at Chatham to Whitehall Palace, from Hampton Court to Windsor Castle, from the Tower of London to the Pall Mall laboratory of Robert Boyle, from the Tradescant Museum to the University of Oxford. The diary describes these experiences in astonishing detail. This edition puts England on the map as a Grand Tour destination, and shows how the Restoration court acted as an important hub for a host of seventeenth-century European princelings undertaking all-important educational travel. The edition is enhanced and contextualised by hitherto unpublished archival sources, including the Tour's financial accounts.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.273
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBoydell and Brewer eBooksSame topicHistorical Influence and DiplomacyFrench-language works237,207