MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805685357 · doi:10.1162/jinh_r_01259

Visualizing Community: Art, Material Culture, and Settlement in Byzantine Cappadocia

2018· article· en· W2805685357 on OpenAlexaff
Hugh Elton

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Interdisciplinary History · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsByzantine architectureEleventhContext (archaeology)ArchitectureAncient historyExcavationPeriod (music)ArchaeologyHistoryEliteEmpireGeographyClassicsArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This beautiful book, lavishly illustrated with more than 400 color photographs, examines the architecture of Byzantine Cappadocia (in central Anatolia) between the fifth and thirteenth centuries a.d. in four long chapters. The first chapter is a valuable and well-illustrated catalog of both built and rock-cut churches in the region. The second chapter examines the painted decoration of the rock-cut churches, primarily during a shorter period, the ninth to the thirteenth centuries. The third chapter covers domestic architecture, including many of the courtyard elite centers once identified as monasteries and subterranean refuges (the “underground cities”), from the fourth to the thirteenth century. The fourth chapter covers monasteries and tombs, with a detailed analysis of Göreme, probably the most famous part of Cappadocia. This chapter, which is more analytical than the previous three, contains an excellent discussion of the relationship between refectories and churches, and of Göreme as first a funeral-monastic complex in the tenth and eleventh centuries and later as an agricultural village (415). Ousterhout concludes, “Cappadocia was probably neither more nor less monastic than any other region of the Byzantine Empire” (478). The mass of cataloged material, which can be nearly impenetrable, is considerably eased by Ousterhout’s clarity.Methodologically, this book treats architecture, not archaeology. Ousterhout’s conclusion includes a plea for more building plans, not for ceramic studies, field surveys, or excavations. Although his brief introduction sets the region in historical context, he presents Cappadocia as a land without history. However, the historical picture is not as bleak as Ousterhout suggests; detailed comparisons with other parts of Anatolia during this period, built on Ousterhout’s foundations, would have been fruitful, both architecturally and historically. However, Ousterhout makes good use of recent palynological research. He is sensitive to the way in which the modern touristic landscape is constructed and to both the relationship of built to rock-cut architecture and the parallels between the imperial capital and Cappadocia. This outstanding volume will be fundamental to all future work about this 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations103
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Interdisciplinary HistorySame topicByzantine Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207