Power and Control in Crusader Acre (‘Akko): The Fortifications of the Genoese Quarter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An impressive fortification system on the northern border of the Genoese Quarter at Crusader-period Acre was discovered, comprising a defensive wall built of bossed ashlars and incorporating arrow slits, a fortified gate leading to the quarter through a vaulted passageway and a projecting tower with two levels of arrow slits. The gate and parts of the passageway were blocked, apparently during the Crusader period, as a consequence of the Saint Sabas War. This war broke out following a dispute between Venice and Genoa over ownership of a monastery located on the border between their quarters, near the port, which was rooted in their struggle over control of the harbor of Acre and the eastern Mediterranean lucrative maritime trade. Written sources indicate that the outcome of this fierce conflict was the expulsion of the Genoese from Acre and the blocking of their quarter. The presence of a blocked gate and the abandoned state of the area are physical evidence of the aftermath of the War. These remains, well-preserved within eighteenth-century Ottoman buildings, do not only shed light on the nature of the Genoese Quarter’s northern fortified borderline but also provide the first concrete material evidence of defense, power and control by the Italian communes in the maritime hubs of the Crusader states.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".