DECORATIONS FROM SHELLS IN THE ADORNMENTS OF EARLY MEDIEVAL SLAVS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The pendant from Luka-Kavetchyna, dwelling 25 (fig. 2: 1; 3) is the earliest find from the Slavs sites dating to the second quarter — the end of the 5th century. The adornment was made of a shell of the genus Murex and is the «legacy» from the Cherniakhіv culture. In the area of that culture are known the pendants made of shells of this genus (type 2 by O. Hopkalo). The pendants from shells appear in use of the Slavs since the second half of the 6th century. Their varieties were used until the first half of the 8th century, although the assemblages and finds with them are few (table 1; fig. 1; 14). In the Slavic assemblages the shells of mollusks of the following species were occurred: Cypraea moneta, C. pantherina, C. tigris, C. arabica. The items from Murex shells are also known. The height of Cypraea moneta is a little more than 2 cm. Other species of shells are larger reaching the height ca. 7—8 cm. The assemblages of the Martinіvka circle include Khatski (fig. 4: A) and Khittsі ones. The grave from Mokhnach belongs to the same antiquities (fig. 2: 2; 5—7). The jewellery by Martynivka circle are dated back to the second half of the 6th century, and the hoards were hidden in the middle — the third quarter of the 7th century. The Pastyrsky circle hoards include the assemblages from Zaitsevo (fig. 4: B) and Kharіvka (fig. 8—10). The hoards by Pastyrsky circle were hidden in the first half of 8th century. The appearance of the pendants from shells is related to the general trend of the spread of Cypraea moneta in Eastern Europe in the early Middle Ages. They are known in the Caucasus, Crimea, the Seversky Donets basin (fig. 11). Cypraea moneta shells were used as pendants in necklaces as evidenced by finds from the Luchiste burial ground from Crimea. The use of other types of shells remains unclear. However, they were probably parts of necklaces or amulets.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".