Counting on Customers: John Campbell, 1806-1891, Middlesex County Handloom Weaver
Bibliographic record
Abstract
John Campbell (1806-1891) was one of about 370 Scottish handloom weavers who brought his technical and professional skills to Ontario in the mid- to late-nineteenth century. From 1859 to 1885, Campbell recorded customer orders for close to 54,000 yards of cloth in a 302-page account book, a document which reveals the relationship between producers and consumers in nineteenth-century rural Ontario. This thesis is a quantitative and qualitative examination of Campbell’s inputs and outputs using his account book, looms and textiles. The analysis of Campbell goes beyond the current historiography of handloom weavers by utilizing evidence from documentary sources and material culture contributing to the larger understanding of a self-employed artisan’s production. The case study of one weaver with this level of detail has not been performed to date and provides an important link for the partnership between handloom weavers and their customers. While Campbell’s customers provided a necessary infrastructure for him to operate by participating in pre- and post-weaving production, Campbell’s presence satisfied his customers’ needs not only for cloth, but a way of life that maintained economic and social stability for men and women in south-western Ontario. This thesis conveys the layers of complexity of weaver, technology and customers at the end of an era for handloom weaving in Ontario.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".