L'Acadie Trouvée: Mapping, Geographic Knowledge, and Imagining Northeastern North America, 1710-1763
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From the British capture of Port Royal in 1710 to the end of the Seven Years’ War, imperial borders in northeastern North America were highly uncertain and vigorously contested. The British “conquest” of Acadia was not an event, but rather a disputed process that took over half a century and required a massive deportation. The rise and fall of French Acadia under de jure British rule demonstrated geography’s central role in the struggle for territorial control. Aboriginal land rights, especially those of the Mi’kmaq and their allies, challenged British and French claims to sovereignty. This dissertation is the first in-depth study of how eighteenth-century geographic knowledge influenced relations among the British, French, and Native peoples in Nova Scotia. \n\nGeographic debates – especially boundary negotiations, mapping projects, and settlement plans – underscored Nova Scotia’s strategic importance in the eighteenth century and complicate the concept of “salutary neglect”. Cartography was a powerful and multi-faceted tool, capable of illustrating past possessions and projecting future claims. It was also constrained by technologies of production and competing interpretations, as overtly biased maps were recognized as such and dismissed. Maps and geographic evidence cannot be properly understood outside of their historical context. British and French subjects were presented with maps and geographic reports in monthly magazines, allowing them to engage with the transatlantic imperial imagination. The growth of printed material, especially in Britain, allowed geographers to influence, and be influenced by, public opinion.\n\nThis dissertation argues that eighteenth-century Nova Scotia/Acadia was neither British nor French, but rather a political and cultural battleground founded on negotiations over geography. The Mi’kmaq shaped these discussions, influencing and modifying European expansion into Aboriginal territory: their claims to sovereignty, represented on maps, surveys, and in treaty negotiations, challenged English pales in the northeast and circumscribed French territorial power. For most of the eighteenth century, contested sovereignty, negotiated alliances, and fragile peace depended on cultural understandings built on shared territory. Mi’kmaq influence continued after 1763, but the Acadian deportation and the arrival of New England planters marked an imperial and geographic watershed as the British successfully mapped Nova Scotia over Acadia.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".