L’indemnité coloniale de 1849 : Mise en place à répartition en Martinique et en Guadeloupe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lorsqu'en 1848 le gouvernement français met un terme à l'esclavage, il se donne aussi pour ordre d'indemniser les anciens propriétaires des colonies. Grâce à la loi du 30 avril 1849 et à son décret d'application du 24 novembre 1849, 126 millions de francs ont ainsi été attribués à des milliers d'individus, dont la diversité insoupçonnée tend à ébranler certains « mythes » construits autour de la figure du propriétaire comme étant nécessairement homme et « blanc ». Les listes exhaustives et informatisées des indemnitaires de la Martinique et de la Guadeloupe, qui recensent près de 6 000 noms, permettent en effet de produire des statistiques sur les femmes et les libres de couleur propriétaires d'esclaves en 1848. Abstract: When the French government abolished slavery in 1848, it also awarded financial compensation to former slave owners in the colonies. The law of April 30, 1849 and its implementation by the order of November 24, 1849 distributed 126 million francs among a diverse group of individuals. An analysis of the demographic make up of this group undermines the notion that slave owners were necessarily male and "White." Using a comprehensive and digitized list of individuals who received compensation in Martinique and Guadeloupe, which contains nearly 6,000 names, this article assesses the involvement of women and free people of colour who owned enslaved people in 1848.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".