MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205220672 · doi:10.1353/phx.2020.0006

Labraunda 5: The Andrones by Pontus Hellström Jesper Blid

2020· article· en· W4205220672 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Philip Sapirstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePhoenix · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDocumentationVisual artsBrotherHistoryMinor (academic)ArtArt historyHumanitiesComputer sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BOOK REVIEWS/COMPTES RENDUS 189 Labraunda 5: The Andrones. By Pontus HellstrÈ om and Jesper Blid. Stockholm: Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul (Labraunda 5). 2019. Pp. 297, 472 figs. This study of the banqueting halls at the sanctuary of Labraunda is the culmination of exploration and research by the Swedish project begun in 1948. The volume is handsomely produced. Discussions of technical issues are clearly expressed, and scarcely an erratum is to be found in its nearly 300 pages. Pontus Hellström authored most of the text, while Jesper Blid was responsible for the drawings, many based on documentation by previous architects—notably Thomas Thieme, who worked at Labraunda from 1979 until his death in 2014. Blid is to be commended not only for the crisp and informative illustrations (particularly vivid restorations are figs. 231, 235, 472), but also for writing several important sections. Except for some minor issues raised below, the interpretative work is excellent and will no doubt represent the final word on most aspects of the design and dating of the andrones. Part 1 is an extended description and reconstruction of the remains. The first two chapters cover the Andron of Maussollos and Andron A, argued to have been begun under Maussollos but dedicated after the succession of his brother Idrieus. The next chapter on materials and construction techniques summarizes the previous descriptions, while Chapter Four examines metrology. The first part ends in an eclectic Chapter Five about nearby structures including the Terrace House (possibly a service building), Hellenistic Andron C, and extensions to the Andron of Maussollos. Part 2 comprises succinct studies on style and chronology (Chapters Six to Seven), closing in Chapter Eight with the functions of the andrones and their reflection of Hekatomnid ideology. The organization and coverage is occasionally eccentric due to the division by author. Blid’s study of the later phases of the Andron of Maussollos,1 which became the entrance and courtyard of a sprawling late antique and Byzantine residential complex, is a valuable contribution to scholarship on the reoccupation of abandoned Greek ruins, but it is difficult to access due to its order of appearance. When reading the primary descriptions of these latter phases in Chapter One, one is left in the dark about their nature until reaching Blid’s analysis in Chapter Five, and then obliged to flip back and forth while parsing it. Blid’s description of Andron C also merits its own chapter rather than being relegated to the end of Part 1. Likewise, Chapters Six to Seven cover some of the same ground and might have been combined rather than split by author. Consistent with the intellectual priorities and graphical standards of Bauforschung, the book is replete with detailed accounts of the remains and richly illustrated by photographs and line drawings of the architecture. The ashlar walls of the two Hekatomnid andrones, whose masonry was quarried from the local gneiss and laid in an irregular header-stretcher format, are remarkably well preserved. Whereas the rough gneiss blocks were evidently stuccoed over, the façade, entablature, and threshold were executed in marble from Herakleia or Milas. Resembling over-sized treasuries, the distyle in antis format of the buildings combines Ionic columns with a Doric entablature. In line with their functions as banqueting and reception halls, however, both andrones have large windows admitting light into the porch and cella. Their considerable breadth—close to 10 m—must have been spanned by enormous and costly timbers.2 The interiors are poorly preserved, but at least a plastered platform for klinai survives along the interior of the cella. 1 Also see J. Blid, Labraunda 4: Remains of Late Antiquity (Lund 2016). 2 The cuttings on the cornice blocks argue against a more efficient truss framework. 190 PHOENIX Architectural historians will appreciate the detailed analyses of the marble elements— those on the antae and Ionic capitals are particularly successful—and of the construction techniques, which include early instances of the Karian-Ionian lewis hole and a surviving double-conical bronze dowel. The authors identify a distinctive decorative and technical system developed at Labraunda between the 370s and the middle of the fourth century b.c.e. and show how the...

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.157 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhoenixSame topicAncient Mediterranean Archaeology and HistoryFrench-language works237,207