MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971567643 · doi:10.7202/010320ar

The Miíkmaq, Poor Settlers, and the Nova Scotia Fur Trade, 1783-1853

2005· article· en· W1971567643 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Julian Gwyn

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Historical Association · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaFur tradeGeographyEconomic historyArchaeologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nova Scotia's fur trade has hitherto been overlooked. It was of small importance so long as hostilities dominated Nova Scotia until 1758-60. Once peace settled on the colony, and when the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia held a virtual monopoly on trapping, the trade remained of little consequence. The principal source of the harvested furs was neither Cape Breton nor peninsular Nova Scotia, but the upper Saint John River Valley in Maliseet territory, and much of it was exported to London via Boston. With the influx of loyalist refugees in the 1780s, the fur trade in what remained of Nova Scotia began in earnest. This view, based on an extensive examination of British Customs House records, is contrary to what previous historians have stated. Led by Nova Scotia's harvest of mink and fox, which represented, after 1810, between 20% and 25% of the annual exports from British North America to London, the colony's fur trade remained vigorous until the 1860s. Much of this increased production, exported from Halifax, resulted from the efforts of poor settlers, who successfully challenged the Native monopoly, as the Nova Scotia Mi'kmaq, from the 1780s, were pushed to the very brink of extinction as a people.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Historical AssociationSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207