Unseen Commons: Natives, Newcomers and Ideas of the Land in the Atlantic World, 1783-1870
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ideas about the place of people on the land were still in flux when the United States won political control over the vast commons that Britain had reserved for Native Americans at the end of the American Revolution.The right to own land was not the be-all and end-all of the Atlantic World's push westward, despite the usual current interpretation. In the behaviour of the settlers, in the financial markets for warrants and other contingent claims to land, in the writings of economists and in the debates in Congress and within the Office of Indian Affairs, it is clear that the rights that the people of the Atlantic World believed they had to use land continued to encompass the idea of shared space and resources: the commons. Ambivalent sentiment about ownership is particularly evident in the negotiation and renegotiation of treaties with the Wyandot, Delaware and Seneca in Ohio as well as the disposition of the Half Breed Tracts of Iowa, Minnesota and Nebraska. Even in the latter part of the nineteenth century, when a new economic orthodoxy required ownership to explain the distribution of profit, rent and wages, the desire for commons remained strong enough to generate preservation movements.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".