The Cimmerian Bosporus in the 5th Century BC (an Old Persian Inscription from Phanagoria)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article is a historical commentary on the Old Persian inscription found at Phanagoria (the Taman peninsula, Russia) in 2016. One can think of four possibilities how the document appeared on the northern coast of the Black Sea: the shipping of the inscription or its fragment to Phanagoria together with other stones as ballast, the European Scythian campaign of Darius I , the expedition of Ariaramnes against the Scythians, and the erection of the stele with the inscription in Phanagoria after the capture of the city – supposedly by the Persian troops. The author rules out the first three possibilities and accepts the fourth one. The inscription was found overlying the ruins of Phanagoria’s defensive works – destroyed by a huge fire sometime in the late first or the early second quarter of the 5th century BC . Judging from the archaeological context of the find, the inscription must have been authored by Darius’ son Xerxes. Many other cities in the North Black Sea area yield evidence of synchronous fires and devastation, which gives us ground to connect the capture of Phanagoria with the evidence from Diodorus (12.31) about certain Archaianaktidai who came to power in the Cimmerian Bosporus. They ruled for 42 years and were succeeded by Spartokos. It is reasonable to presume that this change of power was a result of Pericles’ Pontic expedition reported by Plutarch ( Per . 20). Thus the conquest of Phanagoria (along with other North Pontic cities) should be viewed in the context of the Graeco-Persian Wars.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".