Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the manuscripts in the rich collection at Leiden University Library was written by a cavalry soldier named Kabudlu Mustafa Vasfi. He was a deli (irregu- lar horseman) in the Ottoman army in the first quarter of the nineteenth century and travelled to many places in the eastern Anatolian and Balkan regions. In 1834 Kabudlu wrote a work called Tevārīḫ, in which he discusses his travels and memories. In the manuscript, he states that he composed the tevārīḫ (chronicle) as an account of the cities he visited and the wars he witnessed. In this article, I discuss the reasons why a deli soldier would pen his memoirs by considering the context of Ottoman book culture in the nineteenth century. The place that chronicles, autobiographies and travelogues occupied in that period is worthy of greater attention, and they shed light on how the narratives of an Ottoman soldier were influenced during the trans- formation from manuscript culture to the era of the printing press. In that regard, by analysing the manuscript, which was written on the eve of print capitalism in Otto- man territories, I try to answer the question of why Kabudlu Mustafa Vasfi referred to his extraordinary travel notes as a chronicle (tevārīḫ). Besides examining two journeys, namely the travels of the author as well as the travels of the manuscript itself, I also discuss other travelogues, chronicles, memoirs and diaries from that period to dem- onstrate the importance of this ego-document written by an irregular soldier within the context of Ottoman literary traditions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".