Colonization is Not a Metaphor: Tracing the Logics of Settler Colonialism Back to the Early Medieval North Atlantic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This project puts artifacts from the early medieval North Atlantic in conversation with resonant Indigenous stories. Through a close analysis of language, narrative, and law in primary and secondary sources, this dissertation shows that the early medieval North Atlantic was an incubator for the settler colonial logics eventually exported by the British empire. Chapter one focuses on two artifacts of national survey—the Dawes Act (U.S., 1887) and the Domesday Inquest (England, 1085)—to understand the colonial logic of census and its legacies in recent discussions of Indigenous sovereignty and land tenure in the United States. The central two chapters foreground Haudenosaunee legal practices and international diplomacy, specifically as they relate to the Great Law of Peace. The Law illuminates novel readings of early medieval treaties, including Alfred and Guthrum (ca. 886) and the Bayeux Embroidery, which this project understands as a kind of treaty document. The fourth chapter, focused on the Old English poem The Wife’s Lament and the experience of modern Indigenous women exiled from their communities by the Indian Act (Canada, 1876), traces the legacies of heteropatriarchy from the early medieval North Atlantic to modern Canada. Finally, the epilogue brings together stories and histories in the genre of slipstream writing to look for ways an Indigenous medieval studies might reassess our relationship to stories such that it allows for new kinds of collations and collectivities to take shape across temporal, national, and disciplinary boundaries.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".