Mobilisation of the Armies of the Polish – Lithuanian Commonwealth before the Battle of Pereyaslav in 1630
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article outlines the mobilisation efforts made by both the Royal and the Hetman’s Chancellery with the aim of concentrating the maximum armed forces of the Crown army to suppress the uprising of the Zaporozhian Host under the command of Taras Fedorovych and Anton But. Particular aspects of the mobilisation were considered, such as the methodology of its implementation with regard to units of the so-called ‘quarter’ army (Polish: wojsko kwarciane), foreign troops, private cavalry banners, separate banners of the Lithuanian army, and the remnants of the Zaporozhian Host that remained loyal to the Commonwealth. Based on various published and archival sources (registers of army levies, official and private letters, narrative texts, etc.), the geography and chronology of the movement of the Commonwealth army units during this mobilisation, their composition, numbers, and the names of their commanders have been established as far as possible. Particular attention was paid to aspects of the mobilisation of the private cavalry banners of the local magnates from the Zbaraski, Zasławski-Ostrogski, and Zamoyski families, which have been little studied by historians so far, although soon after their mobilisation provided significant support for the quarter army. The beginning of the long and difficult mobilisation of a foreign regiment under the command of Jakub Butler and the Denhoff brothers and the preparation of the Crown artillery for the campaign are also discussed.The research also helped to conclude that after the first stages of mobilisation before the Battle of Pereyaslav, Field Crown Hetman Stanisław Koniecpolski had sufficient forces (in terms of quality and numbers) to stop the main part of the insurgents’ army and to attempt to engage the enemy in gruelling battles in open field.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".