To burn it all? The practice of holocausts and moirocausts in ancient Greek religion
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper offers a review of holocaustic rituals in written and material sources arguing that this type of sacrifice was rare. It further addresses if the animal was burned whole or if the carcass was flayed, emptied of blood and intestines, and sectioned before being placed onto the fire. Since the evidence suggests that holocausts did not necessarily mean the burning of an intact animal, the relation between holocausts and moirocausts, sacrifices at which a larger part of the animal was burned, is also explored. Finally, the ancient evidence for holocausts is considered in the light of the results of the experimental cremation of a lamb and a pig performed at Uppsala in 2014. It is argued that a Greek holocaust may have aimed at burning the meat beyond human means of consumption rather than at a total annihilation of the carcass by fire, and that the long time it seems to have taken to perform a holocaust can be linked to the purpose of the ritual.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it