‘Sic Finis’ 17th-century burial places & spaces in northeast North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upon the arrival of European settlers to North America, plans had to be made to deal with the dead. This dissertation focuses on early organized burial grounds from the 17th century within settlements founded by the British, Dutch, and French, in order to examine how they were established within their respective communities. Religious, sociopolitical, and cultural backgrounds were assessed for potential influence over the placement of their respective burial spaces to compare burial landscape development in settlements founded by different colonizing nations. Resulting data revealed similarities between burial organization within competing settlements, primarily based on their religious backgrounds, and shed light on the variety of burial practices in British settlements based on the variety of religions allowed to practice in the colonies. Within those sites, the visibility of Black peoples and Indigenous peoples was examined, both contemporaneously and contemporarily, using primary source material and archaeological evidence. Colonial burial grounds are often thought of as ‘white’ spaces, but were often the final resting place of enslaved and free Black or Indigenous peoples residing in the settlements, alongside the settlers. This research discusses the visibility of their graves in the colonial burial landscape, and work being done today to bring their lives and contributions into our understanding of the colonial world. In addition, a case-study to explore the development of a burial landscape spanning 400 years of continuous settler occupation was conducted in New Perlican, Newfoundland and Labrador, working closely with the local heritage society. The surveys conducted provided insight into the development of burial grounds within a single, rural community, and the resulting maps were created for New Perlican’s future heritage protection and development.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".