Images of Iceland and Greenland in the Late Seventeenth and First Half of the Eighteenth Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article considers external images of Iceland and Greenland from the latter part of the seventeenth century and the first half of the eighteenth century in terms of their perceived ‘otherness’ during that period. The main methodologies used are approaches derived from imagology, or image studies, and postcolonial studies. The principal sources used are published writings by Western European authors, mostly from Britain and Germany. In essence, the most common discourse on Iceland and Greenland during the period in question reflects that of other marginal lands and territories most under Western European influence. While images of these two countries did have their own characteristics because of their ‘islandness’, they were distinguished first and foremost as being situated in the high north. We can call the qualities that were attributed to them borealism, a kind of orientalism or tropicality of the high north. One of the dominant themes in the otherness of these two northern islands is what might be called ‘primitive utopia’. The representation of Iceland and Greenland as paradise islands, even treasure islands, was also familiar. Negative and dystopian ideas were also common, in fact much more so for most of the period. By these accounts, the countries were described as uninhabitable because of the prevailing cold and wildness, and their crude barbarian inhabitants were depicted as being hardly distinguishable from animals. The same kind of dualism found in the narratives of the European Other in general was clearly an important factor in the process of the identity formation of these two islands.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".