Un mode par excellence de résurrection des noyés : la fumée du tabac et la persistance des pratiques autochtones dans la France du XVIII <sup>e</sup> siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the mid-nineteenth century, tobacco smoke enemas became the preferred method for reviving drowned people in major European capitals. The origins of this practice remain elusive. The proponents of this technique, first proposed in 1740 by René Antoine Ferchault Réaumur, did not provide any theoretical rationale for its effectiveness. Instead, they referenced an anecdote suggesting that the practice began when a soldier, witnessing a grief-struck husband beside his drowned wife, offered his pipe to blow tobacco smoke into her intestines. Such a process was reportedly observed among the Mi’gmaq and described by trained surgeon Dièreville in his 1708 publication Relation du Voyage du Port Royal de l’Acadie ou de la Nouvelle France. Like physicians of the time, historians interested in this resuscitation practice have overlooked its roots in Indigenous knowledge. However, during this Age of Enlightenment, as medicine was becoming increasingly Cartesian, it was tobacco — the sacred plant of American Indigenous peoples — and its smoke evoking the soul and vital breath, which was believed to possess the power to revive drowned people.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".