MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388294185 · doi:10.1353/tfr.2023.a911391

People of the Post by Erika K. Hartley and Michael S. Nassaney (review)

2023· article· en· W4388294185 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Randa J. Duvick

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œFrench review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArchaeology and Natural History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismContext (archaeology)HistoryArchaeologyArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: People of the Post by Erika K. Hartley and Michael S. Nassaney Randa J. Duvick Hartley, Erika K. and Michael S. Nassaney. People of the Post. Western Michigan UP, 2022. ISBN 979-8-42585-728-6. Pp. 75. This book is one of a series presenting and interpreting the archaeological site of colonial French Fort St. Joseph in southwest Michigan. The fort was established by the French on the St. Joseph River in 1691, came under English control after 1763, and was abandoned in the 1780s; archaeological investigation of the fort’s site started in 1998. The investigation is run by the Fort St. Joseph Archaeological Project, a “multidisciplinary, collaborative […] project in historical archaeology aimed at investigating the fur trade and colonialism in southwest Michigan” (10). Although today there are no signs of the fort aboveground, digs each year yield artifacts that shed light on the lives of the French and Native Americans who lived there in the eighteenth century. The four short books published by the project aim to help a lay audience better understand the historical context of the fort and its material culture. Although this volume—like the others in the series—deals specifically with Fort St. Joseph, it nonetheless illuminates the history of the French colonial presence in the entire western Great Lakes area, known in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries as the pays d’en haut. Placing the fort in its economic and cultural contexts, the book explores the lives of those who lived there, the “people of the post,” by examining the many archaeological artifacts found onsite as well as historical documents like business and military records, letters, and journals. One of the merits of this book is that it takes care to introduce a variety of people. Readers meet the post’s French speakers, both individuals like the fort’s blacksmith, Antoine Deshêtres, and groups like Jesuit missionaries and French soldiers. Fur traders and voyageurs were, of course, present at Fort St. Joseph, and the book helpfully traces the history of this trade, showcasing related artifacts found at the fort such as lead seals from trade-cloth bales, silver brooches, and glass beads. Descriptions of the lives of women and children—including métis children who were born of the unions between French and Natives—help give a rounded portrait of life at the post. Sections telling about both the earliest Native American inhabitants of the area and the Potawatomi, who lived in the area when the French established the fort and still reside there today, create a nuanced presentation of the complicated cultural world of the pays d’en haut. Lavishly illustrated with maps, photographs of artifacts found on site, and pictures of reenactors portraying the eighteenth-century people of the post, this volume is an attractive and useful introduction to the period of France’s colonization of the Upper Midwest that avoids a romanticized picture of “voyageur life.” With both in-depth portraits and shorter sidebars highlighting a single artifact or document, it is accessible for anyone—including both teachers and students of French—who wants to know more about this period and the people who lived in and around Fort St. Joseph when it was part of la Nouvelle France. [End Page 224] Randa J. Duvick Valparaiso University (IN) Copyright © 2023 American Association of Teachers of French

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œFrench reviewSame topicArchaeology and Natural HistoryFrench-language works237,207