Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term Zulu is placed in its historical, ethnic and regional context. Twentieth century beer vessels are then classified according to four main types: imbiza, uphiso, ukhamba and umancishana, which also correspond to the use to which they were put. Within these types five main regional styles based on form and surface decoration emerge: Phongolo, Nongoma, Hlabisa, Melmoth-Eshowe, Lower Thukela and Msinga. The styles are illustrated by means of a classified database of 106 beer vessels. During the last quarter of the twentieth century, stylistic boundaries were frequently blurred due to relocations of people and the increased mobility of the pot making families. There is no evidence that the characteristic blackened Zulu ceramic ware existed before the middle of the nineteenth century. It is absent from excavations of late eighteenth century settlements. During the disruptions of the early decades of the nineteenth century, beer baskets were in common use as drinking vessels. It is likely that the distinctive regional stylistic features of the ceramic vessels developed in the nineteenth century Shepstonian locations in Natal (from about 1848) and the redefined tribal regions of the former Zulu kingdom after the Anglo-Zulu war of 1879. It is suggested that the reasons for the spread of this distinctive pottery are to be sought in the socio-political and religious transformations of the time.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".