The “Latins” on Mangup. Unique Western-European Cross-Encolpion from the Excavations of Prince’s Palace in Ancient Mangup: Problems of Attribution and Dating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. The article is devoted to the analysis of a unique cross-encolpion of the WesternEuropean type from the excavations of the Mangup Prince’s Palace. Methods. The research is complex. When describing the find, traditional methods of art history analysis were used, and data from X-ray fluorescence studies were used to determine the material of the product. Attribution of the cross is made on the basis of the generally accepted method of analogies in archaeological science. Analysis. The encolpion is related to a small group of cast silver crosses with “Latin” features, which were produced during the third quarter of the 15th century in one of the craft workshops of Kaffa. Their author was a master-scholarship holder who most likely moved to the capital of Genoese Gazaria in the Northern Black Sea region from one of the cities of Northern Italy. Results. Among the many reasons why this encolpion, as a mandatory attribute of the clothing of a Catholic Priest, could end up on Mangup, the most likely are: unknown in the sources Genoese embassy to the capital of the Principality of Feodoro in the period of 1450–1475 for the purpose of establishing a permanent Catholic mission here; the presence of a Catholic priest in the large embassies of Kaffa to the court of the rulers of Feodoro in 1455, 1465 or around 1471; participation of Genoese, who fled from Kaffa after its capture by the Ottoman army, in the subsequent defense of the Mangup fortress in summer and autumn 1475.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".