A Summary and Analysis of J.R. Miller’s “The Southern Numbered Treaties,” and Sharon Venne’s “Understanding Treaty 6: An Indigenous Perspective”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are many accounts of the history of the treaties between the Crown and the Indigenous peoples in Canada. This paper summarizes and analyses two of them. J.R. Miller, history professor emeritus at the University of Saskatchewan, gives an account of treaties one through seven in his article, “The Southern Numbered Treaties,” which is contained in his book Compact, Contract, Covenant: Aboriginal Treaty-Making in Canada. Sharon Venne, an accomplished First Nations lawyer and member of the Cree Nation, also writes about the treaties in southern Canada, focusing particularly on treaty six, in “Understanding Treaty 6: An Indigenous Perspective.” These two articles analyze the processes of treaty making, and offer perspectives contrary to the popular narrative, as well as arguing that the popular narrative does not include the entire history. This paper starts by summarizing each article separately, then analyses some of the main points. The analysis will argue in favour of the arguments put forth by Venne and Miller.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".