The Spark in the Powder: Iroquois Freemen Trappers in the Rocky Mountain Fur Trade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article challenges Iroquoian stereotypes portrayed in existing fur trade records by contrasting the failure of the Hudson’s Bay Company (HBC) to integrate Iroquois and Métis trappers as successfully as the North West Company (NWC) had. The article also compares that to the successful integration and positive portrayal of Iroquois and Métis (mixed-desent) trappers within the American Rocky Mountain fur trade. Racial and economic discrimination by the HBC toward the Iroquois caused a negative impact on the financial success of the Snake Country expeditions under HBC’s Alexander Ross. Additionally, behaviors resulting from such discrimination received negative portrayals in Peter Skene Ogden’s HBC reports. To some extent, the desertions sparked by Iroquois and followed by other freeman trappers on the Weber River in 1825 was a strike for better pay, yet it also reflected a reaction to management styles. American Robert Campbell used a more flexible approach in working with the solidarity of the Iroquoian and Métis trappers and their families.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".