MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114807831 · doi:10.1177/0309089212438002

Judean Pillar Figurines and Ethnic Identity in the Shadow of Assyria

2012· article· en· W2114807831 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the Old Testament · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersDivision of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems
KeywordsAssyriaIdeologyHegemonyEthnic groupIdentity (music)Representation (politics)Shadow (psychology)PopularityHistoryPeriod (music)Hebrew BibleEmpireAncient historyEmperorBiblical studiesSociologyAnthropologyPhilosophyAestheticsPoliticsArchaeologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the much-debated Judean pillar figurines (JPFs), which date to the late Iron Age in the Levant and appear to be uniquely Judean artifacts. Scholarly discussion of JPFs, which has spanned a century, focuses primarily on questions of representation and use, and has contributed to the ongoing debate over the role of Asherah/asherah in monarchic Judah. The article begins with a survey of this significant discussion. Its ultimate goal, however, is to move towards a new understanding of the figurines’ popularity in the eighth and seventh centuries bce. Why did the figurines flourish in Judah during this particular period? Drawing from Antonio Gramsci's concepts of cultural hegemony and ideology, the article suggests that JPFs should be understood as part of a late Iron Age cultural discourse: the figurines represent one attempt to maintain local identity as the Neo-Assyrian empire rapidly expanded and absorbed much of the region.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.652

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.228 · 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