Transportation and its Control in the Late Mughūl Ulūs: From Perspectives on the Stations and the Passes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines control over transportation in Eastern Turkestan under the rule of the late Mughūl Ulūs (mid-16th to late 17th century), the dynasty that was pivotal in completing the process of Islamization in Eastern Turkestan. Controlling transportation has always been of vital importance so that rulers retain their dominion and authority over a given territory, even more so in huge inland empires, like the ones that Muslims built in Eurasia during the Medieval Ages. This was the case in Eastern Turkestan going as far back as the time of the Western Turkic Khaganate. In the middle of the 13th century, this area hosted a well-maintained postal system known as “yāmchī system” under the Yuán dynasty. However, after the decline of Yuán dynasty’s rule, the rise of the Chaghatay Ulūs and under the rule of the Mughūl Ulūs, it is not well established what kind of control regulated transportation in this area. In order to grasp the complexities of Mughūl Ulūs’s rule over Eastern Turkestan from the perspective of transportation three points of interest are discussed. First, the manzil network is examined in order to give a picture of the infrastructure of transportation in this area. Second, travel passes are explained: which authority issued them, what was granted through their possession, and what was the state of affairs of the actual caravans 34 and the security that was promised to them. Last but not least, the argument is concluded by analyzing the postal systems in East Turkestan under the Mughūl Ulūs, where, contrary to the era of Mongol rule, a failure of the stated system is acknowledged. After giving an outline of the transportation system and the way in which it was governed during the late Mughūl Ulūs, the paper concludes that this represents a clear example of the failure of a transportation system in a country that was disintegrating.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".