MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2603032251 · doi:10.3138/mous.14.1-01

Men, Women, and Wine: A Gender-Based Analysis of Lucanian Necropoleis

2017· article· en· W2603032251 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Chiara Albanesi, Ilaria Battiloro

Bibliographic record

VenueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of Canada · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsMount Allison University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBanquetGreeksGrave goodsConsumption (sociology)PoliticsRanking (information retrieval)HistorySociologyGender studiesGeographyAncient historySocial scienceArchaeologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we provide a fresh perspective on how societies of ancient Lucania were structured, focusing especially on the role of high-ranking women. In particular, we explore the social implications of ritual banquet and sympotic practices that the Italic populations borrowed from the Greeks living in the coastal poleis, as demonstrated by the deposition of sympotic items in high-ranking burials as means of self-representation. Current literature on the Lucanian world asserts a clear-cut division of roles between male and female, men being the protagonists of social and political life, and women being confined within domestic boundaries. Our research addresses whether and to what extent this simplistic dichotomy is valid. Examining a group of sample tombs from a few cemetery sites reveals a far more nuanced and intricate picture. High-ranking female burials display grave goods that imply the practice of sacrifice-banquet, which also involved wine consumption. What does the presence of these objects in female tombs mean? Do they testify to women’s participation in convivial practices that, in the Greek world, were considered exclusively male? If so, what are the social implications? To address these questions, we look at the recurrence of sympotic objects and banquet tools in female burials; at the association of grave goods of different types within the same tomb; and finally, at the socio-economic role of the deceased.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMouseion Journal of the Classical Association of CanadaSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207