A milestone in Canadian legal history
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review essay critically examines the first volume, covering the period from pre-contact until 1866, of a three-volume history of law in Canada. The essay assesses, in particular, how the book deals with Indigenous law and Indigenous-settler legal relations as well as the histories of private law and criminal justice in the French and British colonies that now constitute Canada. The book is an extraordinary achievement. It surveys a vast number of legal issues across the three foundational legal traditions in Canada (Indigenous, French, and English), draws together a huge array of scholarly works and primary sources, and presents an impressive number of new arguments and interpretations. The review essay also examines how the book highlights issues where more research is needed because crucial questions remain unanswered as well as areas where the book could be revised for a future second edition. Overall, the essay concludes that this is a must-read work for anyone interested in Canadian legal history and the histories of Indigenous-settler relations and colonization. This book is a milestone in the discipline of Canadian legal history and will be a standard work for generations of scholars.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".