Wampum Belts with Initials and/or Dates as Design Elements: A Preliminary Review of One Subcategory of Political Belts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wampum, defined as native-made shell beads of roughly standardized size and shape, evolved early in the seventeenth century and served as an essential element in the interactions among several Native nations and various European groups. The central region of wampum production was around Long Island Sound, while the principal area of wampum belt use was up the Hudson River and into Canada. Primary use was among the Five Nations Iroquois (Six Nations after 1722) and the Huron Confederacy. The incorporation of these shell bead elements of regular size (roughly three to four millimeters in diameter and eight to ten millimeters long) into woven bands, commonly called belts by the English and colliers by the French, took place at about the same time. The relationship between the standardization of this particular shell bead form and the production of wampum belts or bands is unknown, although it remains the focus of much speculation.\nTrue wampum, or that category of shell beads of standard size also called “belt” wampum, was used primarily among the peoples of the Iroquois and the Huron confederacies, with the contiguous territories of these peoples creating a zone that Becker characterizes as the “Core Area.” Beyond this region the use of wampum beads, and particularly belts fashioned from them, was much more limited. Among the Penobscot, in Maine, one of the cultures beyond the Core Area, the chronological sequence for the use of wampum, as well as the range of functions, differed considerably from what has been described in the Core Area. The role of what George Price identifies as the “wampum-producing tribes” such as the Wampanoag and Shinnecock, as well as each of the separate cultural traditions that developed for employing wampum (cultural transformations and unique features), merits its own separate study.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".