To the history of the Basilian monastery in Besidy in the late 17th century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two documents of the last quarter of the 17th century on the history of the OSBM monastery in the locality of Besidy are put into scientific circulation. First of all, it is the privilege of confirming of the foundation of the monastery, issued by King Jan III Sobieski in 1689. Due to this privilege, we can identify the name of the founder (Jan’s mother, Zofia Teofila Sobieska) and specify the time of the foundation of the monastery (before 1661; until now, the year 1667 was generally accepted among researchers). The king’s document gave the monastery extensive rights, while relieving it of a number of fiscal burdens. Residents of neighboring villages were not allowed to fish in the monastery pond and build houses on their land. The privilege also regulated the rules of election of the hegumen (he could only be a representative of the local monastic fraternity).Another document on the history of the monastery was issued by Andrzej Rzeczycki, the head of the neighboring starosty (royal domain), in 1694. In it, he allowed the monks to shut down the pond, although it threatened to flood the lands of the village of Kamianka Voloska under his control. To relieve the tension between peasants and monks, Rzeczycki promised compensation to his subjects, but forbade them to create any obstacles to the monks upon penalty of fines. The monks, according to document, were required to pay starost of 250 zlotys from each release of pond water.Thus, the analysis of both documents makes it possible to find out some of the circumstances of the founding of the monastery of the Basilian monks, as well as to reveal the interpersonal relations. Moreover, if the first document describes the future prospects in the life of the monastery, the second document reflects the reality of daily occurence of monks, in which there was a conflict with neighbors.Keywords: Besidy, OSBM, foundation, Jan III Sobieski, Kamianka Voloska
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.004 |
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".