The Effects of Christianization Among the Indigenous Communities of Kongo & Lower Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the end of the seventeenth century and the turn of the eighteenth Europeans had discovered, explored, and in some cases conquered, the continents of Africa and the Americas. The Western world was heavily Christian, and so missionaries made it their goal to spread Christianity to newfound indigenous people who they deemed “savages,” or, at the very least, pagans. Many historians have explored the religious aspect of contact in great detail. John Thornton has written numerous works on the outcomes and implications of the Christian presence in Kongo, which began as early as the fifteenth century. Conversely, Daniel K. Richter has explored the same interaction on the American continent, although in a slightly later timeframe. Despite similarities between the missionary experience in both areas, challenges and outcomes in each region were radically different. Two women, Dona Beatriz from the Kongo and Kateri from the Mo hawk nation, are useful guides in examining the processes and outcomes of evangelizing in such different areas. This paper casts Beatriz and Kateri as autonomous figures in their own conversion. Both women lived during roughly the same time, and both devoted their lives to the Christian faith. However, Dona Beatriz was scorned and eventually killed for her faith-based movement, while Kateri was recently beatified as the first Native American saint. This study contributes a transcontinental comparison to the study of exchange during the period of Atlantic exploration in order to more fully understand the intricacies of the Christianization process and to highlight the role indigenous people had in their own conversion.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".