Shared Experiences: interactions of aboriginal peoples and the ‘outsiders’
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This volume of Aboriginal History presents a diverse group of papers concerned with historical and political issues and experiences of aboriginal peoples in their interactions with the 'outsiders', the adventurers, government officers, traders and settlers who came uninvited into their countries from foreign lands.They focus not only on indigenous Australians but also on indigenous minorities in New Zealand, Canada, the United States of America and Norway.While some papers deliberately use comparative approaches in their discussion others concentrate on only one of these regional settings, leaving the reader to draw out some of the similarities and differences for him or herself.The lengthy gestation of this collection reflects the complexities of bringing together papers from such a diverse range of authors, some of whom responded to initial calls for papers and others of whom fortuitously happened to submit papers which coincided with this theme.I hope that the final collection is not only of interest but also generates further inquiries which may lead to more discussion on these topics in future.Common themes highlighted in this collection of papers include the early contact experiences of indigenous groups with explorers, traders and others; the process and effects of land alienation, land rights recognition and negotiations; the impact of assimilationist policies; and the realities of contemporary indigenous international networks. Early contact experiencesTwo papers -Baker and Scott -use very different types of information to describe early contact experiences.Baker, using Thomas Mitchell's journals of his travels in Australia and Lewis and Clark's accounts of their journeys in North America, presents the explorers' perspective and speculates on the similarities and differences between these frontier experiences.An interesting contrast was the close interaction between the American explorers and the Indian peoples whom they encountered, demonstrated by the explorers' willingness to live off local natural resources and mix with their 'hosts'; and the deliberate distancing of Mitchell and his party from such contact, an approach which made their survival in the 'bush' much more precarious.On the other hand both Mitchell and Lewis and Clark stress the common assumption on the part of the Indian and Aboriginal groups whom they met that the strangers were 'spirits'.Scott, using Cree narrative histories and mythologies, confirms the persistence of such beliefs and speculates on the importance of reciprocal behaviours in enabling relatively peaceful contact with the 'whiteman'. Land Alienation, Land Rights Recognition and NegotiationCraufurd-Lewis' overview of the development of treaties in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States of America explores contrasts in the perceptions of the value Elspeth Young, a geographer and currently Director, Graduate Studies in Environmental Management and Development at the Australian National University, has worked with Aboriginal groups in central and northern Australia and has conducted comparative research with indigenous peoples in northern Canada, Alaska and Botswana.Her main research interests include contemporary indigenous land management and appropriate planning for indigenous community development.
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 | 0.013 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.042 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".