MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070268867 · doi:10.1177/000842980503400301

Mt. Gerizim and Mt. Zion: A study in the early history of the Samaritans and Jews

2005· article· en· W2070268867 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gary N. Knoppers

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonarchyAncient historyContext (archaeology)HistoryCommonwealthClassicsAssyriaKingdomPoliticsArchaeologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores how a new and very important development in the study of ancient Samaria sheds light on the import of two Judean texts written during the late Achaemenid or early Hellenistic era. The study begins with a discussion of the recent excavation of a large temple complex on Mt. Gerizim largely dating to the Hellenistic era, but with some material evidence stretching back to the Persian era. This remarkable discovery helps to answer some old questions, but it also raises new questions about Samarian-Judean relations during the Second Commonwealth. The selected case studies stem from the book of Chronicles and deal with Judah's relations with northern Israel. One involves King Abijah's address to "Jeroboam and all Israel" at Mt. Zemaraim during the early divided monarchy (2 Chr.13:4-12), while the other involves King Hezekiah's Passover invitation sent to all quarters of Israel, including the estranged northern tribes (2 Chr. 30:6-9). The study clarifies the context within which postmonarchic Judean writers worked (including their views of and aspirations for their own communities) by re-examining the larger geo-political and religious circumstances in which they lived.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations28
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Religion/Sciences ReligieusesSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207