MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Solidus of Justinian I from the 6th Century Fire Layer in Phanagoria

2019· article· ru· W3212930746 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Абрамзон М.Г., Остапенко С.Н.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageru
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicByzantine Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAncient historySolidusQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryArchaeologyPeninsulaByzantine architectureGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

В ходе раскопок на городище Фанагории в 2019 г. вдоль восточного борта раскопа Нижний город был вскрыт слой пожара 6 в., в котором погибли здания, в одном из них находилась винодельня. Среди самых ярких находок солид Юстиниана I (527565), имеющий определяющее значение для датировки катастрофы. Солид отчеканен в 6й оффицине Константинопольского монетного двора в 542565 гг.н.э. В Фанагории, как и в других боспорских городах и поселениях, археологически фиксируются два слоя пожаров 6 в. Во второй четверти 6 в. город подвергается разгрому и разрушению, о чем свидетельствует первый слой пожара, в котором найдены снаряды от метательных машин. Эти события связывают с восстанием против вассала Византии гуннского вождя Грода в 528 или 534 г. Второй слой пожара в Фанагории датируется последней четвертью 6 в. и связывается с событиями 576 г. походом тюрок на Боспор, когда пострадала большая часть крепостей и малых городов Керченского и Таманского полуостровов. Датировка солида Юстиниана I из слоя разрушений подтверждает, что мы имеем дело со вторым пожаром 6 в. После 560 г. на Боспоре Киммерийском появились теснимые тюрками авары на своем пути на Истр, откуда они отправили посольство к Юстиниану I. Вслед за аварами на азиатский берег пришли тюрки, которые затем в 576 г. осадили и взяли Боспор (Керчь). Таким образом, находка солида Юстиниана I в слое пожара связана со временем прихода на Тамань аваров в середине 6 в. или тюрок в 570х годах. Прибытие и тех и других неминуемо несло внешнюю угрозу Боспору, в том числе и Азиатскому. Но кто именно авары или тюрки разрушили Фанагорию, остается пока неизвестным. During excavations in Phanagoria in 2019, a burnt layer of the sixth century was recovered along the east edge of the trench Lower City, containing buildings destroyed by the fire, among them a winery. There is a solidus of Justinian I (527565) among the most prominent finds, providing the date for catastrophe. The solidus was struck in the sixth officina at the Constantinople mint in 542565. There are two sixth century burnt layers discovered in Phanagoria, as well as the other Bosporan cities and settlements. In the second quarter of the sixth century the city was burnt and destroyed, that is testified by the first burnt layer containing missiles for siege engines. These events could be connected with the rebellion against Hunnish chief Grodes, the Byzantine vassal, in 528 or 534. The second burnt layer in Phanagoria is dated to the last quarter of the 6th century, in connection with the events of 576, when the Turks attached most of the fortresses and small towns on the Kerch and Taman Peninsulas. The date of Justinian Is solidus from the burnt layer points to the second great fire in the late 6th century. After 560, the Avars pressed by the Turks on their way to the Istrum (Danubius) arrived at the Cimmerian Bosporos, where from they sent an embassy to Justinian I. Soon the Avars were followed by the Turks who in 576 besieged and occupied Bosporos (Kerch). Consequently, the find of the solidus of Justinian I in the burnt layer can be connected with the arrival of the Avars in the middle of the 6th century, or the Turks in the 570-s. Both peoples offered a threat for Bosporos, especially its Asiatic part. It is not clear, however, who actually destroyed Phanagoria, the Avars or the Turks

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score0.985

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicByzantine Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207