Peter Moogk's Nouvelle France: A Return to the Quest for Origins?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
My analysis of Peter Moogk's book covers three points, the first two quite specific and the last more general. Some aspects of the nine chapters that Moogk devotes to New France itself are dealt with first. There follows a critique of the work's last chapter, entitled "The Apples Do Not Fall Far from the Tree," in which Moogk attempts to show that not a few characteristics of French Canadian (and more precisely québécois) society in the year 2000 can be explained by values inherited from New France. The last section of the article addresses the question posed in its title, concerning the direction of Moogk's reconstructive enterprise. In the end, is the author casting light on the present, thanks to his study of the past? Or is he doing the opposite, reading the past through the filter of his particular view of the present? It is hoped that these comments will encourage historians to be more careful when they generalize about the settlers of New France.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it