Canadians and the Founding of the Society for American Archaeology (1934–1940s)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In December of 1934 the Society for American Archaeology was officially constituted. In 1935, in an effort to grow the membership, professional archaeologists were asked to propose members who they endorsed to become affiliated with the SAA. The two professional archaeologists in Canada at that time, Diamond Jenness and William J. Wintemberg of the Dominion Museum, Ottawa, proposed names of individuals across Canada who were collectors, museum curators, and historians. A small number suggested for membership joined, but most did not. This was an interesting period in North American archaeology as professionals worked in committees to establish cultural and temporal frameworks of the archaeological past, establish excavation guidelines, and lobby against the sale of antiquities. Some Canadian avocationals who joined were positively impacted by their association with American archaeologists and their legacies continue through to today. The bottom line is that there were very few professional archaeologists in Canada following Wintemberg’s death in 1941, and that lack coupled with WWII, meant that Canadians looking for professional support and guidance looked to the south of the border. The Society for American Archaeology was important for the growth and development of Canadian archaeology during this time.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".