COMMERCIAL MARKS ON AMPHORAE FROM PHANAGORIA DATED TO THE THIRD QUARTER OF THE 6th – 4th CENTURIES BC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
В статье публикуются шесть граффити на амфорах третьей четв. VI – IV в. до н. э. из раскопок Фанагории. Граффити № 1 и 2 представляют особый интерес, поскольку вырезаны на сравнительно редком для Северного Причерноморья типе амфор «à la brosse» из Аттики. Граффито ΑΙΤ (№ 1) предположительно является сокращением имени владельца сосуда. Граффито ΙΣ (№ 2) встречается четыре раза в позднеархаическое время в Фанагории. Оно интерпретируется как маркировка имени владельца сосудов или хозяина посудной лавки. Имя владельца сосуда Павсаний процарапано на части тулова протофасоcской амфоры (№ 4). Граффити ΧΙ, Х, А на фрагментах хиосских амфор рассматриваются как торговые маркировки места производства вина (№ 4, 5) и, возможно, его сорта (№ 3). The paper publishes six graffiti on the amphorae dated to the third quarter of the 6th – 4th centuries BC originating from the excavations in Phanagoria. Of special interest are graffiti No. 1 and No. 2 because they were scratched on à la brosse type of amphorae from Attica which is a relatively rare find in the North Pontic zone. Graffito ΑΙΤ (No. 1) is presumably an abbreviation of the vessel owner’s name. Graffito ΙΣ (No. 2) has been found four times on the vessels from the Late Archaic period in Phanagoria. It is interpreted as the marking of the vessel owner’s name or the owner of the shop where vessels were sold. The name of the shop’s owner who was called Pausanias was scratched on the body of a proto-Thasian amphora (No. 4). Graffiti ΧΙ, Х, А on the fragments of Chiosian amphorae are viewed as trade markings of the place where wine was produced (No. 4, 5) and, possibly, its type (No. 3).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".