Public security and prevention of offenses in Chernivtsi, Suceava and Khotyn volosts of Moldavia and Khotyn raiyah of the Ottoman Empire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article focuses on the understudied problem of public security and prevention of offenses in the territory between the Upper Siret, the Middle Dniester and Suceava, which from the middle of the 14th to the last quarter of the 18th century was part of Moldova and formed Tsetsin (from the middle of the 15th century Chernivtsi), Suceava and Khotyn volosts of Moldova, mainly inhabited by Orthodox Rusins and VLakhs. Having analysed written sources and scholarly literature, the author states that throughout the entire Moldavian rule in Chernivtsi (until the middle of the 15th century in Tsetsin), Suceava and Khotin volosts (tinut) there were no special police agencies in the modern sense. Until the last quarter of the 18th century, public security was ensured by Moldovan officials, curteni and various categories of service people - slujitors. Ensuring law and order and fighting against robbery on the border was assigned, mainly, to the elders-pircalabs, who in the 18th century began to be called ispravniki.They were assisted by volost elders (okolashi), vetavs of the cities, great border captains, aghas, colonels, armashes, aprods and their subordinate curteni and tinut slujitors (calarasi, arnauts, byrans, guards, armored warriors, dorobanii), as well as hired beshlis. The law and order in rural communities was maintained by dvornikis and vatamans (village elder). After the accession of the Khotyn region to the Ottoman Empire, the public security in this new Turkish raiyah was entrusted to the Janissaries of the Khotyn garrison; the commanders of the Ottoman military units - alai beys - were responsible for order in the villages of the Khotin nahiye.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".