Frontierism and metropolitanism in relation to development on the north shore of Lake Superior / by Donald J. Auger.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the various influences within the \nmetropolis-hinterland construct that were evident in the development of the area around \nThunder Bay and along the north shore of Lake Superior during the period from \nConfederation up to about 1890. Economic, political and other metropolitan relationships \nin the communities along the north shore of Lake Superior were developed and controlled \nby various external urban centres from their early beginnings right up to the turn of the \ntwentieth century. In this thesis I will review some of the metropolis-hinterland influences \nthat were evident in the area. \nMetropolitan influences can be found throughout much of the development of the \nNorth American continent, particularly the portion that would later be called Canada. All \nof the early voyages of discovery, like the first fishing ventures on the Grand Banks and \nother places, amply demonstrate the efforts of various European capitals, or metropolises, \nto exert their control over the newfound hinterlands. The fur trading companies and other \ncommercial ventures, usually acting under Royal Charters, would later exert the same \nmetropolitan control over the broad expanses of the interior of the continent that were \naccessible by the extensive waterways. In both of these cases, the resident population of the \nhinterland would have no say in any developments that took place in the region. This aspect \nof metropolitanism is one that can be found at all stages of the political and economic \ndevelopment of the country and it figures prominently in the development of the areas along \nthe north shore of Lake Superior and the area around Thunder Bay. \nIt is my thesis that the resident population of the area around Thunder Bay and along the north shore of Lake Superior, whether aboriginal peoples or settlers in the area, had no \nsay in the developments that took place in the region because all of the key decisions were \nmade by people in far away places who controlled the various metropolitan interests that \nwere active in the region. \nIn the first chapter of this thesis I will review the staples and other theories, as well \nas the metropolis-hinterland construct as originally stated by J.M.S. Careless, Gras and \nothers. I will also review some of the early economic and political activities that \ndemonstrate the metropolis-hinterland relationships that arose as a result of activities in the \nstudy area. As examples of these relationships, I will look at the fur trade, the early \ntransportation activities of the fur trade companies, and the Indian treaties of 1850. In the \nsecond chapter I will review Confederation and the purchase of Rupert?s Land. I will also \ndiscuss the development of some of the first metropolitan influences in the area, namely the \neconomic relationships that were established as a result of mining activities, government \nsurveys and construction of the Dawson Road. \nIn last chapter of the thesis I will review certain economic and political initiatives \nduring the period from Confederation up to about 1890. I will also review some of the \neconomic activities that occurred like the development of mines, settlement, the fisheries, \nand the timber and grain industries. I will review the development of transportation through \nhuge, government-sponsored projects like the Dawson Road and the Canadian Pacific \nRailway, and the disputes over jurisdiction in the area purchased that arose between the \nfederal government and the governments of the provinces of Ontario and Manitoba.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".