Fur, Fortune, and Empire: The Epic History of the Fur Trade in America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eric Jay Dolin. Fur, Fortune, and Empire: The Epic History of the Fur Trade in America. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, July 12, 2010. 442 pages. $29.95 (cloth). Fur, Fortune, and Empire: The Epic History of the Fur Trade in America is a sweeping work that showcases the vital role the fur trade played in the colonization and expansion of the United States. Most of us think of Canada or perhaps the north woods of Maine or Minnesota when we think of furs. Few realize that the fur trade was a key factor in the survival of the Pilgrims and Puritans of Massachusetts, the Dutch in New York, and of the early settlers of the Mid-Atlantic States. The Puritans in particular were so assiduous in their pursuit of the fur trade that for a time all Europeans were referred to as Boston Men by their Native American trading partners. Eric Jay Dolin relates many of the familiar horrors and injustices of our relations with the native inhabitants, including the introduction of diseases, firearms, and alcohol. But he also sheds light on many little known facts that give a far more nuanced picture of the intercourse between two vastly different cultures. It is now taken as an article of faith that European settlers cheated the Native Americans out of vast wealth by trading trinkets for valuable furs. But iron fishhooks, pots, and tools were of immense value to members of a less developed culture, especially when all they needed to provide in exchange were pelts from a seemingly limitless supply. As for wampum and beads, they were a medium of exchange for the Native Americans of no less intrinsic value as gold was to the settlers, and therefore seemingly a bargain when traded for surplus pelts. This book demonstrates how the Native American culture grew to be dependent on European trading goods, and was transformed accordingly. The common perception of Native Americans living in harmony with nature before the advent of the White man was perhaps true. But it is also true that the near extermination of many North American fur bearing animals, with the exception of the buffalo, was accomplished primarily by these natives in pursuit of trade goods. The slaughter was initiated at the behest of the settlers to be sure, but it was perpetrated primarily by Native Americans. It was not until the widespread use of the leg hold trap allowed Western mountain men the option of easily killing their own prey that this equation started to substantially change. The author also recounts an anecdote that illustrates just how destructive alcohol, another item of trade, was to Native American cultures. Women learned from experience to hide all weapons of any kind from their men on the eve of a trading conference with the settlers. If the men received alcohol as compensation for furs, they would often drink until fighting broke out. This would frequently prove serious or fatal if weapons were at hand. Perhaps there is a history lesson here as our society debates open carry legislation allowing firearms into bars and restaurants. The early exploration of the West was primarily driven by the quest for furs. Gold, silver, and farmland were later factors that attracted succeeding waves of settlers to the West. But it was the beaver's misfortune that their pelts were perfect for the making of felt hats, then in high fashion in Europe, and they are what attracted the earliest inhabitants. …
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".