MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1163508966

Chapter 8: Were Simple Baskets Always Central to the WDS?: Putting All Yours Sins in One Basket

2013· article· en· W1163508966 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marshall Joseph Becker, Jonathan C. Lainey

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the American Philosophical Society · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMormonism, Religion, and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeWhite (mutation)ArtHistoryPeriod (music)Ancient historyArt historyGenealogyLiteratureAestheticsBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Onondaga Transition, by 1894, from Dogs to BasketsIn what may be prototype of WDS among Oneida in 1800, presented earlier, Kirkland described ritual killing of three dogs, one of which was left to decompose. The other two Dogs are thrown into fire, & shortly after of (Pilkington 1980: 365367). Baskets had been burned for as long as white dogs, and probably before, but external observers have continued to focus on death and cremation of dogs. An important note on antiquity of burning, and its link with WDS, is an unreferenced note made by Elisabeth Tooker. In her effort to place origin of WDS before period of Handsome Lake, Tooker (1970: 110) presents an account of dog feast that she dates to time of American Revolution. She offers no reference, but we offer here her narration of this report:... others went round to every with basket, in which each individual was required to deposit something. This basket, with all its contents, was first cast into fire. Afterward dog was laid on and thoroughly roasted, and was then eaten. This was followed by . . .(Tooker 1970: 110)other events typical of midwinter feast at which dog was eaten. Note that and its contents were burned first. later transformation to white dog that was sacrificed without its flesh being eaten was part of development of rituals of WDS. If anything, sacrifice predated WDS. This gathering of sins in form of offerings to be burned is distinct from another collection noted in Tooker's synthetic Seneca account in which Tooker (1970: 138) describes an woman carrying huge basket who, on third and fourth days (of seven), went from to and gathered materials for feast.By bringing all of detailed descriptions of WDS together, we can shift our collective gaze to one element of ritual that previously had seemed relatively minor. most visual, intense part of WDS involved ritual killing, ornamentation, hanging, and burning of dog or dogs. low level of concern with presence of baskets at midwinter rituals is clearly demonstrated by many synthetic accounts of WDS. Not single synthetic example includes mention of burning of baskets. This lack of attention to baskets as part of ritual appears to be function of ethnographic blind spots.In 1884, pyre at Onondaga was used for burning dog together with baskets of tobacco and herbs (Anonymous 1884a). Canadian Onondaga in that same year carried of incense in procession and presumably burned both (Anonymous 1884b; Herschfelder 1886).Not long after, William Beauchamp declared that actual sacrifice of dogs at Midwinter Feast had ended, he attended the concluding ceremonies of White Dog Feast at Onondaga, N. Y., January 18, 1894, under escort of Daniel La Fort, head chief' (Beauchamp 1895: 209). While term white dog remained associated with name of Midwinter Feast among outsiders, in 1894 white or baskets and perhaps their contents had come to replace sacrificial dog as principal offering (cf. Becker manuscript A, regarding baskets and wampum).Recorded as being in attendance at Onondaga in 1894 were dozen women as well as some 30 men, including Thomas Webster, keeper of wampum, [who] wore feather (cf. Becker, in review A). This headdress was of gustawa type. procession of elders from short house to council-house, also known as longhouse, consisted of three men, the last of whom bore white basket, which represents dog.The Seneca group observed by Boyle in 1898 (1898: 95) placed a small old chip-basket with homegrown tobacco near tail of sacrificial dog. At various points during procedure, they threw tobacco into fire and lastly with remaining tobacco. …

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.724
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the American Philosophical SocietySame topicMormonism, Religion, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207