Shell Beads and Belts in 16th- and Early 17th-Century France and North America
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scholars generally agree that wampum belts were new artifacts among the Indigenous peoples of northeastern North America in the first half of the 17th century. However, the context of and reasons for their emergence are still little known or misunderstood. Archaeologists and ethno-historians have often assumed that the shell beads used in the manufacture of wampum belts were Indigenous artifacts and part of a long tradition that continued until the Colonial era. Although this tradition did exist, I nevertheless argue that wampum belts were also the result of profound changes: they emerged as novel tools for intercultural communication in the aftermath of European colonization in the 16th and the first half of the 17th centuries. Studies have up until now focused on the impact of the Dutch and the English, as opposed to the French, despite their widely-acknowledged role in the bead trade and the emergence of wampum. This study seeks to fill this gap with an interdisciplinary analysis of the written sources and archaeological collections.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it