“To His Excellency the Sovereign of all Russian Subjects in Canada”: Emigrant Correspondence with Russian Consulates in Montreal, Vancouver, and Halifax, 1899–1922
Bibliographic record
Abstract
C onsular officials form an important element in the institutional frameworks that historically have supported transnational human relationships. 1 But probably because functions performed by consulates tend to be considered too mundane, they seldom appear in the foreground of migration history. When consuls do receive a mention, it is most often as monitors of emigrants’ political orientations and promoters of the official ideologies of the governments they serve. What usually remains out of the picture is the fact that the initiative in contacting consular officials often came from emigrants themselves. Most authors who have written on emigration from Europe, and from the Russian Empire in particular, seem to take it for granted that moving overseas effectively cuts off the emigrants’ ties to the state of birth and its overseas agencies. While Russian political exiles or religious dissenters may indeed have preferred to keep an arm’s length distance from the czarist government and its representatives, the relationship of the ordinary labor emigrant with the home state was different. Long after leaving the country of their birth, many peasants and artisans who ventured out to America in pursuit of the dollar rather than freedom continued to stay tied not only to Old World family and kin networks, but to the institutions of the Russian imperial state as well. Having for the most part remained Russian subjects, they were not only liable to be taxed or called up to the army, but also entitled to the services and protection of the imperial government, despite the fact that about 75 percent of the emigrants left Russia in a clandestine way without taking out a passport. 2 These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".