Les recherches canadiennes dans le quartier de la “Rotonde de l’Odéon” à Carthage : un ensemble paléochrétien des IVe-Ve siècles ou une phase d’occupation et de construction du VIIIe siècle ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review deals with a new examination of the published data of the excavations west of the rotunda. These were carried out intermittently between 1976 and 2000 by Pierre Senay. He has steadfastly upheld the theory, once cautiously suggested by Alexandre Lézine, of the presence of a Christian basilica west of the rotunda and has identified the lot as a late Christian complex of the 4th century. The authors review the available data to study again the stratigraphy of the sector and conclude that a systematic filling was early on visible in the stratigraphy but not identified as such. This filling covers the area west of the rotunda all the way up to the cardo maximus and lies partly on top of a datable level, i. e. the geometric mosaic as well as a mysterious triconch-shaped structure, and is sealed by the substructure of a large mosaic, the “mosaïque aux oiseaux”. Within this systematic filling, very late Roman and a few Islamic sherds were recovered, as well as a coin dated to 759 A.D. (142 Heg). Senay has argued that the triconch is part of the basilica, but the stratigraphy does not substantiate this theory. The structures built within this filling, the “mosaïque aux oiseaux”, a basilica planned building and a basin, are therefore of Islamic date, and the mosaics associated with them are the first mosaics of Islamic date found in Carthage. This is proof that post-Byzantine Carthage was not merely a ruined city occupied by squatters, but that a civic life of some sort persisted there well into the Abbasid period. This survival of an antique urban way of life has already been noted elsewhere in North Africa.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".