TheParticipationof Molotschna Mennonites in the First Regional, National, and International Exhibitions (Mid-19th Century).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the article, the authors study the early experiences of Mennonites` participation in state and international agroindustrial exhibitions during the 1840s-1860s. The involvement of the Mennonites in these cultural events indicated official recognition of the colonies' achievements and provides important information for broader conclusions regarding the general level of development of the region and the empire during the early modernization (pre-modernization) period. Industrial and agricultural exhibitions reached their first peak of popularity in the second third of the 19th century. Participation in them became a mandatory duty for Mennonite colonies. Taking part in those events the congregations showcased the results of their economic achievements, reflecting their adherence to the principles of their “Privileges” and the didactic mission imposed by the Russian monarchs. The list of exhibits offers a snapshot of the settlements' development just before the transformative Great Reforms. The exhibitions also demonstrate a dynamic shift in economic development, evolving from agricultural products to the implementation of early agricultural machinery. By the mid-1860s, Mennonites had already embarked on industrial projects, but it took time for their entrepreneurs to gain recognition. The history of Mennonite interactions with various central bodies and exhibition organizations challenges the idea about the colonies' isolation. The analysis of Ph. Wiebe's correspondence reveals his pivotal role in managing the colonies. As an ambitious leader, he showcased his abilities both as an organizer and as a lobbyist for the local Molochna elite which was loyal to him. By the mid-19th century, there was no established industrial elite strata within Mennonite society, and the circle of participants was quite narrow. Reliable information regarding the exhibition activities of the Chortitza colonies is limited. Given that Wiebe was responsible for both (Molotschna and Chortitza settlements) groups of the so-called "Mother colonies," it is assumed that the Mennonite leader primarily lobbied for the Molotschna settlements which he had closer ties to. This study helps to dispel the notion of Mennonite history as a mostly local phenomenon providing a broader dimension for their past.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".