Ordering the land beyond the Sixth Cataract: Imperial policy, archaeology and the role of Henry Wellcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Sudan occupies a fairly complex place in archaeological enquiry. This is not a result of the archaeological record, rather it is due to a particular perception of the Sudan, its archaeology and history. The first excavators were archaeologists and anatomists who either worked in Egypt or in the Mediterranean, while the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium encouraged white-only scholars to both conduct research and to be active members of the newly formed political service in order to ‘know the natives’. In other words, archaeology from the outset was intimately connected to a particular political narrative and aim. This paper traces the historical context from the early 20th century to the development of archaeology south of beyond the Sixth Cataract south of the present-day capital of Khartoum, showing how it was created by Henry Wellcome. In particular, it focuses on the vast mortuary and habitation site of Jebel Moya, south-central Sudan, where new fieldwork is yielding fruitful results. Henry Wellcome's contribution to archaeology remains under-acknowledged. This long-overdue critical assessment traces and contextualizes the historical trajectories at play and situates them within the broader historical archaeology context.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".