Bibliographic record
Abstract
a leading scholar of the Russian Old Believers and a distinguished historian of Muscovite Russia, has gathered together in this volume a number of his published studies dating back to 1988 and two works not published before.Several of them will be of particular interest to the folklorist interested in the Russian North or in the historical background to much Russian folklore collected over the past two hundred years.As Crummey points out in his Preface, his interest in the Old Belief is somewhat curious: he is a Canadian, (and therefore had not the access to Soviet archives afforded US scholars as a result of the various academic exchange programs, especially IREX), and a Christian in the western tradition, with no background in Russian Orthodoxy or Russian history.But as he points out, he did have a certain amount of luck in addition to his excellent training, and he soon became a scholar of renown with the publication of his The Old Believers and the World of Anti-Christ (1970).The book opens with an informative historiographic essay that sets the stage for the eleven articles to follow.The second essay in the book, "Old Belief as Popular Religion," was published in 1993 during the heyday of, especially, European studies of popular religious movements, particularly in the Roman Catholic parts of Western Europe.Soviet-era contributions to the discussion, one has in mind here the outstanding contributions of Bakhtin and Gurevich, by and large avoided any serious study of possible homegrown popular religion in the Russian Church, largely for ideological reasons.Crummey's essay was then a welcome addition to the subject, however tentative it may have been.He points out that the Old Belief originated not among the laity but among the middle ranks of the clergy and that it certainly was not originally a mass movement at all.In time it came to be supported across the social spectrum but it remained a highly
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".