Exploring the Impact of Captions on the Construction and Presentation of Colonial Latin American Cultural Identities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spanish Colonialism in Latin America from the late sixteenth to the late eighteenth century constitutes a time period during which the interactions between numerous cultural groups, both indigenous and colonial, resulted in the creation of distinct regional, cultural, and individual identities and artistic practices. The proposed paper explores the role and importance of Spanish captions in paintings created in the colonial viceregal centers of New Spain (today Mexico) and Peru through a discussion of two maps from the Relaciones Geográficas (indigenous made maps), three colonial portraits, and two casta paintings (painted records of racial mixes). These paintings, spanning from the end of the sixteenth to the eighteenth century, all feature written segments directly on their surface to enable the effective communication and portrayal of the chosen colonial subject to the viewer. Being created in such a diverse and unstable cultural climates each paintings’ capacity for success in communication and representation was ensured through the use of captions. Thus, the paper approaches the study of captions through a close consideration of the discussed captions’ messages, their intended perception, and main audience. My paper will discuss the instrumental role of the Spanish captions when visualizing and creating distinct colonial identities. The caption served as a means of literally spelling out the importance of the colonial settings, their distinct social systems and identities reinforcing their validity vis-à-vis the imposed Euro-Spanish ideal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".