Migration of the Oirats in the first quarter of the 17th century on the eve of returning to Dzungaria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1541 the Oirats managed to form the Middle Confederation, which was led by the Khoshuts as the most powerful people. In the second half of the same XVI century the Oirats, suffering from attacks of their neighbors - the Turkic peoples from the west and south and the eastern Mongols from the east, began to move towards southern Siberia. Earlier they used to roam along the Black Irtysh river and north of the lake Zaysan, but now they began to move below the lake Yamysh. Opinions on the migration routes of the Oirats, existing in the literature, need clarification. The author offers his vision based on the archival materials and the Mongolian sources: the Hoyt Oirats, driven out of Kharakhoto by the Tumat Altan Khan, were the first to go towards the Altai Mountains. The next were the Torgut Oirats, who crossed the Altai, and then, together with the Derbets, they moved down the Irtysh river. The Elelets, the future Dzungars, left Western Mongolia for the Yenisei river sources. Already in the second decade of the 17th century the Oirats wandered along Om, Kamyshlov, Tobol and Ishim rivers, that is, they were roaming along the middle reaches of the Irtysh river. In 1623, at lake Yamysh, they defeated the troops of the Hotogoit Altyn Khan Sholoi Ubashi-Khuntaiji, but this victory did not exclude an internal struggle in the ruling house of the Khoshuts, which resulted in weakening of this people. Further civil strife forced the Torguts to move towards west, and in the early 1630s they reached the Volga river. Migrations over such long distances were possible only if there was an effective management apparatus, while maintaining traditions and identity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".