The Plans for the Abolition of the Zaporozhian Host and their Implementation (1740s–1770s): Cossack Ambitions vs Imperial Interests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Referring to materials from the federal and state archives of Russia and Ukraine, the authors analyse the preparation and implementation of the abolition of the Zaporozhian Cossack Host, carried out by the government of Empress Catherine II. Many of the sources have never been studied previously. The authors aim to reveal the causes and reasons for the abolition of the Sich, and the timeframe of the process. The authors consider the plans and projects for the abolition of the Sich from different periods and proposed by different representatives of the imperial authorities. The authors prove that the abolition of the Zaporozhian Sich was not a one-time military operation that took place on 4 June 1775. They study the means by which the Russian authorities tried to solve the Zaporozhian problem during the third quarter of the 18th century, reflected in the projects drawn up by M. I. Leontyev, P. A. Rumyantsev, and K. von Stoffeln. They examine the socio-economic, demographical, political, and other aspects of the domestic and foreign policy of the Russian Empire, which influenced the social evolution of the Zaporozhian Cossacks Host and led to its confrontation with the government. Additionally, the article considers the reaction of the Cossack community to the abolition of the Sich.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".