An Archival Ethnography of Edward Sapir’s Nootka (Nuu-chah-nulth) Texts, Correspondence, and Fieldwork through the Douglas Thomas Drawings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The practice of using drawing and image rendering to declare rights and histories is long-standing among Nuu-chah-nulth people on the west coast of Vancouver Island. This article analyzes a collection of images created in 1916 by Douglas Thomas, a Nuu-chah-nulth man from the Tseshaht First Nation. His eldest son, Alex Thomas, sold these drawings to linguistic anthropologist Edward Sapir, who was at the time in charge of the anthropology division of the Geological Survey of Canada. The drawings depict critically important cultural information about ceremonial practices and protocols and are similar in style and content to the much larger-scale cedar screens (kiitsaksuu-ulthim) and cloth curtains (thliitsapilthim) of the same time period. By returning facsimile and digital copies to the family of origin, this research illustrates how anthropologists may play a role in fostering productive and reciprocal relationships between Native source communities and the archives that hold some of their treasured information.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".