Bayard Dominick expedition
1920 scientific expedition to the Pacific islands of Polynesia
The Bayard Dominick expedition was a 1920 scientific expedition to the Pacific islands of Polynesia, with four teams sent to compile archaeological and anthropological surveys of the Marquesas, Tonga, Austral Islands, and Hawaiʻi.
The expedition's first year was financed by Bayard Dominick who was a member of the New York Stock Exchange. He gave a gift to Yale University of $40,000 and this was sent on to the Hawaiian museum. The Tonga team was Edward W. Gifford and William C. McKern both from the University of California and the botanist was Arthur J. Eames from Harvard University. The Marquesas team was Edward S. C. Handy from Harvard and Ralph Linton from the University of Pennsylvania accompanied by the Yale botanist Forest B. H. Brown, and Mrs. Brown and Mrs. Handy as volunteer assistants. The Austral Islands team was John F. G. Stokes (Bishop Museum staff), Robert Thomas Aitken (Columbia University) and volunteer assistant Mrs J. F. G. Stokes. Finally the Hawaiian team was Louis R. Sullivan from Brown University and Kenneth P. Emory from Dartmouth, Harvard.
The public source identifies “Bayard Dominick expedition” as 1920 scientific expedition to the Pacific islands of Polynesia. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Bayard, Dominick and expedition.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Bayard Dominick expedition”, the useful work is to connect “1920 scientific expedition to the Pacific islands of Polynesia” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
The date and method of observation matter as much as the stated conclusion, especially where classification or consensus has changed. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 20, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q16839271. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1920.
A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Bayard Dominick expedition”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Bayard Dominick expedition primary sources, Bayard Dominick expedition archive and Bayard research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Bayard Dominick expedition”?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Bayard Dominick expedition” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.